Stress Debriefing

It is evident that, individuals who are exposed to life-threatening events are at high risk for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as a result, critical incident stress debriefing does not necessarily reduce incidence of PTSD (Lewis, 2002). Due to societal costs of chronic PSTD, the mental health care professional manages to develop an early method for interventions (Regel, 2010). Psychological stress debriefing was mainly designed to prevent and mitigate emotional distress among individuals (Regel, 2010). In summary, the paper will discuss on how critical incident stress debriefing does not reduce the incidenceof post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as well as, discussing whether preventing an officer from developing PTSD should be the measure of success for a critical incident stress debriefing.

According to Regel (2010), Psychological briefing refers to a brief crisis intervention, which is administered to a person during the days of traumatic event. Psychological stress debriefing is significant because it gives people opportunities of talking about their feelings as well as, reacting to the critical incident. The aim of debriefing is to reduce the severity incidence, duration and traumatic stress (Outsourcing Compassion, 2013).

Critical incident in this case refers to an event, which has significant emotional power that can overwhelm the usual coping methods such as physical threat to the safety. Critical incident can involve situations or events that are faced by public safety personnel or people causing distressing. According to Lewis (2002), Post-crisis stress debriefings may alleviate the acute stress responses that appear at the scene or at the last inhibit, which delays the stress reactions. Lewis argued that debriefing should only be offered to an individual who is exposed to a critical incident, regardless of whether the person is experiencing stress-related symptoms (Regel, 2010). Conversely, culture of policing may not contribute to the incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This is because; stress debriefing will have been designed to help in dealing with the symptoms which are associated with the exposure of the trauma. Therefore, stress debriefing will definitely allow the people involved with the incident to process and reflect on the impact (Lewis, 2002).

Research showed that debriefing methods proved their clinical effectiveness beyond reasonable doubt. However, there is no current evidence showing that psychological briefing is a useful treatment for the prevention of post traumatic stress disorder after the traumatic incidents. As a result, debriefing of victims of trauma should cease (Regel, 2010). Today, debriefing has become a standard practice in diverse settings as a result of officers and other emergency service personnel. Therefore, preventing an officer from developing PTSD may not be the measure of success for a critical incident stress debriefing. Research shows that the International Critical Incident Stress Foundation trains approximately 50,000 people each year in order to provide debriefing to the people exposed to trauma (Lewis, 2002).

Reference

Lewis, G. (2002). Post-crisis stress debriefings. Behavioral Health Management, 22, 4.

Regel, S. (2010). Psychological debriefing–does it work? Health Care Counseling & Psychotherapy Journal, 10(2), 14-18.

Outsourcing Compassion: Debriefing Trauma Patients. (2013). Outsourcing Compassion: Debriefing Trauma Patients. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4842962