Recovery from Trauma

A large literature now exists on trauma recovery, best practices, and different therapeutic approaches, well summarized in recent such key texts as that edited by Christine Courtois and Julian Ford, and in the volume edited by Edna B. Foa and colleagues. The focus in this entry will be on contextualizing concepts of trauma recovery generally, with greater emphasis on recovery from complex trauma specifically.

Recovery from trauma is typically both mul-tidetermined and multidimensional in nature, and the process of recovery is a dynamic and complex phenomenon. As stated in the entry in this encyclopedia titled “Trauma Resilience, Ecology of,” what recovery from trauma “looks like” depends on a confluence of factors, such as “the nature and chronicity of the events in question; demographic factors such as age, race, class [sexual orientation], and gender; neurobiological mediators of hardiness and vulnerability; [and] the influence and stability of relevant social, cultural, and political contexts.” For example, recovery from single incident, adult exposure trauma may be fully resolved with little or no aide of professional intervention. For those who may access formal care, protocols to facilitate or accelerate trauma recovery tend to be time-limited in nature, such as cognitive-behavioral approaches or those using exposure.

In other cases, particularly those involving early, recurrent, or extreme violence and abuse, traumatic responses can be debilitating and efforts at recovery may require a complicated medication regimen and an extended period of both individual and group psychotherapy. Indeed, the concept of “recovery” may be expressed in relative terms. As Mary R. Harvey points out, trauma impact, recovery, and resiliency are best viewed as multidimensional phenomena. This frame recognizes that individuals can be simultaneously impaired on a number of domains of functioning and show remarkable resilience in others, as is often the case with complex trauma.