The Pathways to Somewhere--I

In a 1998 article in The Journal of Social Issues, Charles Carver discusses “Resilience and Thriving: Issues, Models and Linkages.”  He describes four possible paths for a sufferer from an adverse (aka “traumatic”) event into the future.  You can see those four paths on the left depicted in the chart taken from that article.  The entire article is available at

http://www.public.asu.edu/~iacmao/
PGS191/resilience%20reading%20%232.pdf.

Carver draws a distinction between “resilience” and “thriving.”  He describes the former as returning at some point to approximately the same emotional state as the sufferer experienced prior to the adverse or traumatic event.  “Thriving” is a state in which the adverse or traumatic event actually produces “the emergence of a quality that makes the person better off afterward than beforehand.”

We look at the reality of post-traumatic benefits and/or growth elsewhere in these pages.  I am most interested at this moment in the pathways described in the chart, the article, and commentary based on this work.  Carver labels the first pathway as “succumbing.”  In simple terms, this means that the victim experiences a permanent state of significantly impaired functioning.  Perhaps this is the state that leads to a higher mortality rate among widows and widowers, especially in the first six months after their loss.

The second pathway carries the name of “Survival.”  Lyubomirsky (The How of Happiness, page 159f.), in her comments on this chart, describes survival as “a permanent impairment of functioning.”  The sufferer returns to a life that bears superficial resemblance to the pre-loss state, but things are never really the same again.  There is no real going on or moving forward.  Instead, the loss becomes a permanent feature of the victim’s emotions, thoughts, goals and priorities.

The third pathway is identified as “Recovery.”  Lyubomirsky identifies this path as a temporary impairment of functioning that is followed by a long-term return to a level at or near the pre-loss experience of life.  Certainly there will be changes to the victim’s life circumstances.  After the passage of time, however, things will have returned to the emotional set point range that is normal for the person, and life will indeed go on.

The fourth pathway is the one that interests me the most.  Carver names it “Thriving.”  Lyubomirsky gives us a shorthand description for that pathway.  Thriving describes a temporary impairment followed by the victim passing (through? around?) the original state in order to rise above or transcend that original state.  Lyubomirsky says, “This person has experienced transformation” (The How of Happiness, page 159).

How does that “transformation” look?  She notes reports of “common transformation experiences” reported in the psychological literature by trauma survivors (The How of Happiness, page 158).  Those reports include:

• Renewed belief in their ability to endure and prevail.

• Improved relationships—in particular, discovering who one’s true friends are and whom one can really count on.  Some relationships pass the test, while others fail.

• Feeling more comfortable with intimacy and a greater sense of compassion for others who suffer.

• Developing a deeper, more sophisticated, and more satisfying philosophy of life.

I would add my own front-line reports to this list.  I have found that, on the one hand, I have a much more developed appreciation of my own insights and gut reactions.  I have spent much of my life up in my head, figuring things out.  It may well be that because I was confronted with something that simply cannot be “figured out,” I developed my gut feelings and learned to trust my instincts much more.  I am extremely grateful for that gift, although I am still learning how to deepen that trust and rely on those instincts more naturally.

I have learned that some of this transformation is related to gender.  McQueeney, Stanton and Sigmon wrote a series of articles tracking bereavement strategies used with men and women dealing with fertility problems in their marriages.  The researchers identified two overall styles for dealing with the effects of such traumatic issues.  Subjects could use problem-focused coping or emotion-focused coping.  

In the studies, it appeared that men responded better to the emotion-focused coping strategies, while the women responded better to the problem-focused coping strategies.  Researchers suggested that men were accustomed to using the problem-focused coping strategies and learned more from a new approach.  They suggested that the same was true for the women, only in reverse.  In any event, I would agree that I benefited more from learning new emotion-focused strategies.

I'll finish this piece in the next post.