The trauma still goes on…: The multigenerational legacy of Northern Ireland’s conflict

Abstract

Numerous studies have been conducted internationally on the subject of multigenerational trauma; however, little is currently known about its existence in the context of the Northern Ireland conflict. The present study explored the outcomes of and mechanisms through which the trauma of one generation impacts on subsequent generations in this context. Using an Interpretative Phenomenological Approach (IPA), this study examined the subjective experiences, beliefs and perceptions of four mothers from Northern Ireland, all of whom had endured trauma during their childhoods. Three main master themes emerged: 1. “Attempting to cope” addressed how the trauma was dealt with, and how these efforts can be the very mechanisms through which multigenerational trauma occurs. Examples include hiding the truth, seeing the truth as dangerous, and knowing and not knowing about the trauma; 2. “The trauma still goes on” highlighted the negative outcomes and consequences of the traumatic experiences within the family such as delayed impact, symptoms and anger; and 3. “Strength through adversity” included the more positive outcomes of their experiences, such as finding meaning through suffering and making efforts to stop the cycle. The results are discussed in terms of the existing theories on multigenerational trauma, and implications for practice are explored.

Keywords

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)legacy multigenerational trauma Northern Ireland qualitative

Introduction

Direct exposure to traumatic events has long been associated with psychopathology, leading to the potential for a variety of outcomes such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (e.g. Fairbank, Ebert, & Costello, 2000), anxiety (Goenjian et al., 2000) and depression (e.g. Person, Tracy, & Galea, 2006). However, a more recent literature has begun to emerge, which suggests the potential for traumatization in the offspring of traumatized individuals. Whilst psychoanalytic writers had previously commented on the possibility that parental neuroses could be transmitted to the next generation (Winnicott, 1967), it was not until researchers began to focus on Holocaust survivors and their families that a clear literature on the intergenerational or multigenerational legacy of trauma began to emerge. The idea that traumatic events to which parents have been exposed can have a psychological effect on their children, was first noted among the families of Holocaust survivors (DeGraaf, 1975; Sigal, Silver, Rakoff, & Ellin, 1973;Yehuda, Schmeidler, Wainberg, Binder-Brynes, & Duvdevani, 1998); however, recent research points to this “intergenerational” or “multigenerational” effect in a variety of contexts (Ahmadzadeh & Malekian, 2004; Daud, Skoglund, & Rydelius, 2005; Davidson & Mellor, 2001; Punamaki & Suleiman, 1990; Selimbasic, Avdibegovic, & Sinanovic, 2007). The main approaches to understanding the transmission of trauma across generations include stress-vulnerability models, transmission of psychopathology, genetic and physiological explanations, social psychological/parenting perspectives, psychodynamic theories and family systems approaches.

Stress-vulnerability models

Some theorists who acknowledge multigenerational effects see the impact in terms of increased vulnerability to developing psychopathology only when traumatic events occur in the lives of the offspring themselves (van IJzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & Sagi-Schwartz, 2003). This perspective suggests, therefore, that rather than parental trauma itself being transmitted through the generations, the increased vulnerability to develop psychopathology is instead transmitted. A number of studies support this hypothesis, and have found that the indirect stress of the Holocaust only affects offspring who are drawn from clinical populations, and who are stressed for other reasons (e.g. van IJzendoorn et al., 2003).

One study, however, may point to a different mechanism of multigenerational impact. Yehuda, Halligan and Bierer (2001) found that although adult children of Holocaust survivors report higher subjective distress to stressful life events, they also have higher rates of childhood adversity than comparison samples. Childhood adversity, particularly emotional abuse and neglect by their own parents and sexual abuse by others, may be the factor which leads to a propensity to react with extreme distress when faced with stressful life events. Indeed, it could be that the higher rates of childhood adversity may account for the psychological difficulties found among the second generation.

Transmission of psychopathology

Another perspective on the multigenerational impact of trauma is that parental trauma in itself is not transmitted, but rather that parental psychopathology is the factor that influences their children. A significant body of literature points to the negative effects of maternal psychological difficulties on the child including their cognitive development (Cogill, Caplan, Alexandra, Robson, & Kumar, 1986), well-being (Cummings & Davies, 1994) and emotional development (Caplan et al., 1989). The literature in the area of multigenerational trauma suggests that PTSD in parents is related to higher rates of PTSD in their children. For example, one study found that children of Holocaust survivors are likely to develop PTSD only when their parents developed PTSD as a result of their Holocaust experiences (Yehuda et al., 2001). The same results were found in studies conducted in various contexts (Dekel & Solomon, 2006; Galovski & Lyons, 2004).

Rates of depression in children of parents exposed to traumatic events, however, appears to be unrelated to parental psychopathology. Being a child of a Holocaust survivor, whether or not their parents experienced psychological difficulties, was related to lifetime depressive disorder in the children (Yehuda et al., 2001). Other psychological outcomes have not thus far been examined. Taken together, it appears that while PTSD in parents is related to PTSD in their children, depression in children of parents who experienced traumas are unrelated to their parents’ mental health.

Genetic/physiological explanation

The genetic explanation holds that something about experience of a traumatic event and the stress response is transmitted physiologically to the next generation, born after the event. Evidence from infants who were exposed in utero to the 9/11 terrorist attacks suggests that such infants are more likely to display greater distress to novelty if their mothers developed PTSD (Brand, Engel, Canfield, & Yehuda, 2006). Yehuda and colleagues (2005) reported lower cortisol levels in 1-year-old babies of mothers who developed PTSD following exposure to 9/11 compared with mothers who did not develop PTSD. However, these studies do not exclude the potential that the early experiences of parenting which these infants received from their traumatized mothers may have led to the sequalae observed. This explanation also does not explain the multigenerational impact of parental trauma on children born prior to the traumatic event.

Social psychological/parenting explanation

The main social psychological approaches to understanding the nongenetic transmission of trauma include social learning and effects on parenting. However, in one study there was found to be no evidence for either social learning or parenting explanations of the increased lifetime rate of disorders among second-generation Holocaust survivors (Schwartz, Dohrenwend, & Levav, 1994).

Psychodynamic explanation

Psychodynamic theorists have suggested a number of ways in which the trauma of one generation may affect another. One hypothesized mechanism is by “transposition” (Kestenberg, 1989). It is hypothesized that children of parents who survived the Holocaust simultaneously live both in the present world, and in the world of their parent’s Holocaust past. Kestenberg hypothesized that this occurs through identification with a parent who is attempting to work through their traumatic past. The children struggle to integrate their fantasies of their parent’s past with their own current reality, and in doing so, may take on various roles from their parent’s past, for example that of victim or of persecutor.

DeGraaf (1998) sees the transmission of trauma occurring through the parent’s projective identification of their “bad child” part of themselves, with their own child. This “bad child” self is usually created within an individual on experiencing extreme helplessness (DeGraaf, 1998), however, in the case of intergenerational trauma, it is projected outwards upon the individual’s child. The parent therefore externalizes their anger, rage, sadness, disappointment and grief onto their child, which may manifest itself as psychopathology for the child later in life.

The transposition or projective identification theories of multigenerational trauma have thus far not been empirically examined. However, the idea that the multigenerational impact of trauma may be a result of difficulties within the attachment relationship, and its subsequent effects on the child, is a more robust finding. Living with a parent who is dealing with experience of a traumatic event may mean the parent is unable to provide a secure attachment for their children. Research conducted with children of Holocaust survivors in the Netherlands, Canada and Israel point to the insecure-ambivalent attachments of the second generation (Bar-On et al., 1998).Other evidence suggests that attachment styles can be transmitted through the generations, with one’s own attachment pattern becoming the pattern with one’s children (Bretherton, 1990). It may be that parents, who had insecure attachment patterns due to their own experiences of trauma, transmitted these patterns through to their relationships with their own children.

Family systems explanation

The family systems perspective focuses on the particular interpersonal patterns present in families in which a member has experienced trauma. The “conspiracy of silence” (Danieli, 1998) has been noted within Holocaust families, whereby the Holocaust is not mentioned and factual information about the event is not expressed between parent and child. The Holocaust is nonetheless expressed non-verbally and remains “silently present” within the home. A variety of studies among children of parents exposed to events such as the Vietnam war (Ancharoff, Munroe, & Fisher, 1998), prisoner of war camps (Nagata, 1998) and the Holocaust (Felsen, 1998) found that in families where the traumas were not talked about, but instead were silently present and expressed non-verbally, there may be increased vulnerability to second-generation effects. This silent approach to trauma within families has been observed by therapists working with families affected by the Northern Irish conflict (Healey, 2004).

Northern Ireland’s “Troubles”

Despite numerous studies which have been conducted internationally on the subject of multigenerational trauma, there is a dearth of literature on the topic in the context of the Northern Ireland conflict, colloquially known as the “Troubles”. One study conducted with family members of those who were killed on Bloody Sunday, 30 January 1972, found high levels of PTSD symptomatology among the immediate family, the children of the immediate family, the cousins of the immediate family, and a lower rate among second cousins of the immediate family, using the Impact of Events Scale (Shevlin & McGuigan, 2003).The rates among the children and grandchildren were comparable to rates observed among individuals who were directly exposed to traumatic events. The authors suggest that this study provides tentative evidence for the possibility that trauma related to the Northern Ireland conflict could affect family members, who themselves have not been directly exposed.

Muldoon and Downes (2007) found that 10% of the Northern Ireland general adult population is suffering with clinically-significant PTSD, as a direct result of their experiences during the conflict. It is therefore likely that there is a corresponding effect on children, who themselves escaped exposure to the regular bombings, riots and shootings which were all too common in Northern Ireland’s troubled past.

Aim and approach: The aim of the present study was to examine the multigenerational legacy of trauma in the context of the Northern Ireland conflict. In order to do this, an Interpretative Phenomenological Approach (IPA) was adopted for a number of reasons. Firstly, IPA allows for an in-depth examination of the lived experiences of individuals in a particular context (Smith & Osborn, 2003). The manner in which trauma related to the Northern Ireland conflict has affected subsequent generations has heretofore not been examined; therefore, a phenomenological approach may highlight the specific issues surrounding this phenomenon in this context. IPA also allows the researcher the opportunity for interpretation, something which may be necessary among people growing up with a “conspiracy of silence”, who may be unused to articulating strong emotions.

Research question: To examine the lived experiences of four families, of which a previous generation had been exposed to the Northern Ireland conflict. In order to do this, the subjective experiences, beliefs and perceptions of four Northern Irish mothers will be explored. In particular, their ideas about the impact of conflict-related trauma on their families will be examined.

Method

Design

A phenomenological design, incorporating a semi-structured interview, was utilized.

Participants and procedure

Ethical approval was obtained from OREC Northern Ireland, the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust and Queen’s University Clinical Psychology Ethics Panel. This study focused on a sample of mothers whose families were referred to a specialist trauma service in Belfast. Therapists from the service were asked to consider probable and possible instances of a multigenerational legacy of the conflict among families on their past and current caseload.

Interview guide

The major themes which were addressed in the interviews were informed by the literature discussed above; however, the questions allowed for the emergence of new themes which may better characterize experiences in the Northern Ireland context specifically. Interview questions were informed by recommendations on phenomenological interview design (Smith & Osborn, 2003) and questions which explored communication about the trauma were adapted from the Parental Communication of Holocaust Experiences Questionnaire (Lichtman, 1984). The interview schedule can be found in Appendix A.

Procedure

Therapists made the first contact with families who met these inclusion criteria. Once initial consent was obtained, potential participants were sent detailed information sheets and were asked to send back an “opt-in” form should they wish to take part. All interviews were conducted between January and February 2009. All four participants had been or are involved in therapy.

Conflict experiences

“Kate” was from an area of high conflict and was exposed to events such as rioting and protests as a child. When she was pregnant, her husband was killed in a conflict-related incident.

“Carol” was also from an area of high conflict. When she was a young child, her father, who was a member of a paramilitary group, was killed in an explosion. At the time of her referral, her own son had become a target of paramilitary attacks.

“Jane” was a young child when her father was killed in an explosion. Her previous post-traumatic symptoms intensified when she gave birth to her first child.

“Rose” was from an area of high conflict and was exposed to rioting as a child. She was the target of continued sectarian attacks in adulthood when her children were infants.

Analysis

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was utilized, since it seeks to explore the meanings which particular situations and experiences hold for individuals (Smith & Osborn, 2003). The interviews were audio-taped and transcribed by the first author. The first stage of analysis involved a number of detailed readings of each transcript in turn, noting initial thoughts. Next, the transcripts were re-read and the initial codes were used in order to develop themes within each interview. The themes were then amalgamated into clusters and superordinate themes were developed based on each cluster. This process was repeated for all other interviews. At this stage, the researcher engaged in interpretative activity in order to extract the most meaningful superordinate themes and to collapse those down further to develop master themes.

Credibility checks

Initially, the interview schedule was devised by the members of the research team. The list of questions were scrutinized and evaluated by a group of ten mental health professionals. Following the analysis, rigour checks were performed by the second and third authors.

Member checks were considered, but deemed inappropriate for a number of reasons. Firstly, phenomenologists including Satre viewed the individual as a constantly evolving process, rather than a fixed entity (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). Phenomenologists generally would therefore disagree with the philosophy of “checking” a member’s account, since one’s perceptions and feelings constantly change and evolve across time. Secondly, IPA emphasizes the importance of the ‘double hermeneutic”, whereby the researcher is aiming to make sense of the participants, who in turn are attempting to make sense of themselves (Smith et al., 2009). In this way, the researcher’s interpretation is viewed as vital to the analysis. Any attempt to “check” the researcher’s interpretation with the participant would therefore be at odds with the subjective and individual nature of the researcher’s interpretation. Finally, member checks were not engaged in due to the sensitive nature of the topic. All participants were offered the opportunity to “opt-in” should they wish a copy of the final report; however none requested this.

Results

The four interviews resulted in three main master themes; 1. Attempting to cope; 2. The trauma still goes on; and 3. Strength through adversity. The master themes will be discussed separately and a diagram depicting the source of each theme is provided in Figures 1–3.

Figure 1-2.

Model of Master themes ‘Attempting to cope’ and ‘The trauma still goes on’.

Figure 3.

Model of master theme ‘Strength through adversity’.

Master theme 1: Attempting to cope.

This master theme encompassed the ways in which the families coped with their experiences, sometimes in ways which were maladaptive to the individual, but protective for others, and sometimes in ways which were maladaptive for the whole family.

The known and the unknown

A key superordinate theme was the known and the unknown, and encompassed many subordinate themes including how families hide aspects of traumatic experiences and engage in cognitive and affective avoidance. For example, Carol discussed how she has no memories from the years around the time when her father died.

“And would you have had experiences of the Troubles in your own life?”

“My father died as a result of the Troubles”

“Oh I see. And how old were you then? ”

“I was 4”

“I see”

“So I was . . . so.”

“And do you remember that time?”

“No.”

“No?”

“Absolutely no memory from the age of 3 up to the age of 8.”

(Carol, p. 8, l. 8)

The theme of “The unspoken” was something which was found in all the interviews. This involves the families’ attempts to avoid talking about the traumatic event at all. Carol’s depiction of how the death of her father was handled within her family is particularly stark.

Cos our younger life was just one big lie. Cos, not so much a lie, maybe I’m not right . . . There was no truth . . . I mean my father was never discussed, he was never talked about. It was almost as if he never existed.

(Carol, p. 25, l. 9)

Carol went on to discuss how in the absence of information, she invented her own explanations for her father’s death. Whilst she attempted to do things differently in her own family, by telling her children about their grandfather and having photographs of him displayed, the real truth of what happened is still hidden. In this way, she is carrying on a pattern of hiding reality with her own children.

“So what would you have thought about your Dad when you were maybe 8, 9? What did you think happened?”

“You fantasize don’t you? I always used to say he had a headache.”

“He had a headache?”

“If anybody asked, he had a headache. He had a headache and he died.”

“Right, Mmmm.”

“And I would still say that to my kids today. . . . You know, but they’re not old enough to understand. I don’t want them knowing ‘cos they don’t need to know.”

(Carol, p. 11, l . 4)

She went on to discuss how she avoids taking her children to her father’s grave, because it would involve breaking the pattern of silence from her own childhood.

. . . it’s just not the place for them because by me taking them there I’m gonna have to explain things – I don’t want to have to explain things.

(Carol, p. 19, l. 1)

Rose also discussed how she attempted to shield her children from her experiences and distress.

I was trying to be the big hero and not . . . you know . . . try to crumble in front of the kids you know. . . . I was just trying to hide it from them really.

(Rose, p. 4, l. 16)

“The truth as dangerous” was another subordinate theme which was found across all four interviews. Kate discussed the fact that she did not tell her children the details of what happened to their father until recently, and that when she did, there were difficult consequences.

Tried not to talk about it . . . it was probably a couple of years ago I told them, you know. And then they flew off the handle. The two of them took it bad.

(Kate, p. 21, l. 3)

Kate also talked at length about another subordinate theme of “hidden but not hidden”. Whilst she tried to hide the facts of their father’s death from her children, and her reactions, she later discovered that they knew more than she had realized.

At the time I thought they knew nothing, but they’ve told me later that they remember me coming down, you know, crying at night. . . . you know, they remembered everything about it. Which I didn’t think they would have remembered. But they remembered a hell of a lot.

(Kate, p. 17, l. 5)

Rose was more aware of the fact that whilst facts are hidden, her daughter may nonetheless have been aware of what was happening.

I mean I wouldn’t have talked about it as such, you know, this is why this is happening or . . . I think I just took it she knew why it was happening you know.

(Rose, p. 24, l. 1)

All four participants talked about their attempts to block out their feelings for fear of the consequences. Kate talked about the time around her husband’s killing when she was pregnant with her daughter.

“I actually was afraid of maybe losing it and harming her. Not harming her like physically, but you know, when she was in my womb, I was afraid to let my emotions . . . you know . . . ” (silence).

“Ok, so if you were really really scared or really upset or something, you were worried that would harm her?”

“Harm the baby, yea.”

(Kate, p. 15, l. 3)

Taking on the hurt of others

This superordinate theme focused on the mother’s attempts to protect her children from hurt and pain. Kate discussed how she wished to feel her children’s hurt for them.

I’d take their pain . . . Wanna feel you know . . . I would have wanted to just take all their hurt away from them . . . I’d have took all their hurt . . . and dealt with it rather than them . . . I could just have took their wee minds out, and just rewinded all the bad bits, and put it back in.

(Kate, p. 48, l. 11)

Kate discussed how she did this by not talking about the traumatic event, and instead focusing on family life and everyday concerns. Whilst these may have been useful methods of managing feelings at the time, they may have also prevented the family from having the option of confronting the trauma and engaging in emotional processing.

Master theme 2: The trauma still goes on

This theme illustrated the mothers’ perceptions of the negative impacts of the traumatic experiences on their families. Some of these impacts were consciously recognized, and others were more implicit within the interviews, requiring some level of interpretative activity on the part of the researcher.

Reactions

The participants discussed the negative reactions of themselves or their children to the traumatic event and its aftermath. Examples included symptoms such as anger, a sense of injustice, delayed impact and current impact. Jane discussed the current impact of her father’s death and how it affects how she is as a mother.

But every waking day that I have, I think about the trauma . . . but I cannot get woke up any day without thinking about it. Never. I don’t think it’ll ever leave. I mean I would love someday to wake up and think “actually, I’m not going to think about it . . . today”. But there you go, I’m thinking of it. I can’t, it won’t go away; it never goes away.

(Jane, p. 18, l. 25)

Jane also discussed her perception of the impact that the trauma had on the career options open to her.

. . . and he said to me “[Jane], why did you never go into medicine?” And do you know what I said? “Do you know why I never went into medicine? Cos my Daddy died in the Troubles. That’s why.”

(Jane, p. 14, l. 9)

Roles

This theme was found across all interviews. It included roles such as being a victim, parental child, adult child and over-protectiveness. Jane discussed how she believes that she cannot escape the role of victim.

. . . if you’re known as you know, the girl down the road . . . who climbed Mount Everest, well that is a very enlightening . . . you must wake up every morning and think “well this is great, I’m well known for something”. But to be . . . all through my existence to literally be “ach you know, the wee girl whose Daddy was killed when she was [age]”.

(Jane, p. 13, l. 2)

All participants talked about how they or their own children took on a parental role during their childhoods. Kate talked about how her son, who was around the age of six at the time of her husband’s death, took on the role of a parental child within the family.

And then I think too with the oldest lad, he told me later on in life . . . that he thought he was the Dad, he had stepped in to take the father role . . . you know to be the man of the house.

(Kate, p. 4, l. 17)

Carol discussed the intergenerational pattern of being a parental child. She felt responsible for her own mother growing up and she recognizes that her son fulfils the same role with her.

He has a great allegiance to me you know. . . . And a great sense of em . . . that he has to look after me. . . which I always felt for my mum.

(Carol, p. 60, l. 8)

Rose discussed how she was overprotective with her children.

. . . If they were going out, if my daughter was going out, I’d be like “where you going, what you’re doing?” You know, a bit of panic when they were leaving in case something would happen to them.

(Rose, p. 20, l. 2)

Repetition and unconscious processes

This theme encompasses aspects which may have been unconscious at the time that they were occurring, but which through therapy, may have become conscious. One example is bonding difficulties, which was discussed by Kate in relation to her daughter whom she gave birth to in the weeks following her husband’s killing.

I think what happened [Orla] was me. Because I was afraid to get close to her when she was a baby . . . Because I thought that . . . you know . . . she was gonna be took away from me.

(Kate, p. 13, l. 6)

Some of the ways in which the participants discussed the impact of the traumatic events actually mirrored details of the original traumatic events. For example, Jane, whose father died in an explosion, used language throughout her interview which echoed this event. When discussing the fact that she becomes very angry with her daughters she said;

I feel that my head is about to actually whizz off my shoulders.

(Jane, p. 17, l. 36)

Interestingly, a particularly disturbing intrusive image which she experienced involved her father with no face and other missing body parts. Later in the interview, when talking about feeling stressed she said, “It’s enough to make me explode in my inner self” (Jane, p. 18, l. 21). And in another place she said,

I would really find myself so stressed, my head wants to explode.

(Jane, p. 18, l. 16)

Carol described how she felt when she was a teenager, and a friend with whom she was having an argument, screamed at her in public that her father had been killed in an explosion. This was something she had not previously known. Her language here contains echoes of the original trauma.

Felt like I had been . . . my head had exploded. Like someone had ripped the insides out of me.

(Carol, p. 13, l. 7)

Repetition is a theme which was interpreted from some of the interviews, and focused on the ways in which the current generation may unconsciously repeat the trauma of previous generations in their own lives. For example, Carol’s son had become a victim of sectarian attacks in his community. He eventually retaliated, which resulted in his arrest. Carol discussed the fact that the night on which he was arrested was the single worst event of her life.

. . . the moment that they were going to arrest him . . . when he had retaliated . . . was the worst moment … the worst moment . . . I think that was the night I just . . . I couldn’t feel anything more.

(Carol, p. 62, l. 10)

It could be hypothesized that this particular event disturbed Carol to such an extent, because it symbolized how her father’s choices had been transmitted to her own son through the generations.

“Anger for what might have been” is another theme which was particularly important for Jane in her relationship with her daughter. She discussed how aspects of her own experience, can stimulate anger directed at her daughter, which may be actually about her own lost childhood.

. . . I would be hard on her. I would be. Harder than I should be. Sometimes, not all the time. Just but on that one occasion where I think, it’s a mixture of “you don’t know you’re living!” You know, “you’re at a brilliant school; the world’s your oyster. And you won’t practice the violin?!” That’s enough for me to think, “well, if you’d had the upbringing I’d had, you’d be grateful for what you’ve got”.

(Jane, p. 17, l. 25)

“Intergenerational patterns” was a key theme which was apparent from all the interviews and highlighted by Jane in particular. She discussed how she believes her own passivity and propensity to be the “good girl” was a conscious attempt to avoid causing her own mother any more stress. However, she is now recognizing these personality attributes in her own daughters.

You know, because at school, you know, I was always the one who was asked to take the pile of books down to the other teacher. You know, it was always me. It was like, “ok”. Because I was dependable. And the three girls are exactly the same . . . they’re always the ones who get asked to do something. And I’m thinking, here we could go again.

(Jane, p. 18, l. 22)

It may be simply that through the process of modelling, her daughters learned to behave in this way also. Alternatively, like their mother, they may have been behaving in this way in order to protect their mother from any more stress or upset than that which she had already experienced in her own childhood.

Carol discussed the fact that her brother left the country and moved abroad in order to escape the pattern of involvement in paramilitary activity which their father had begun.

He felt there was no choice for him if he remained here – that he would go down the same road . . . I think that’s why he felt obliged to leave here, you know, cos he had no choice because that was what lay ahead of him if he remained here.

(Carol, p. 71, l. 1)

She also discussed the inevitability of the multigenerational impact of trauma.

Cos history follows you . . . Regardless, it follows you . . . it’ll have an impact on my kids’ lives . . .

(Carol, p. 71, l. 16)

She wondered whether her own coping mechanism, of not discussing the trauma, might adversely affect her own children.

And will they be sitting here in 30 years’ time having the same conversation with you . . . about the damage that I’m doing to them by not telling them?

(Carol, p. 70, l. 8)

Master theme 3: Strength through adversity

This master theme arose from all the interviews and dealt with the more positive aspects of living through traumatic experiences. This theme encompasses how the participants have attempted to take the good out of the bad events in their families, to focus instead on priorities and an underlying higher purpose.

Meaning

This theme dealt with the ways in which the participants drew meaning from their traumatic pasts. This theme also involved the participants’ descriptions of how others in the family attempted to look for the higher meaning or purpose behind the events that occurred. Many involved a theme of religious significance and a sense that, whilst difficult events have occurred, they may have happened for a reason. Jane discussed the fact that her mother helped “soften the blow”, by attempting to find a religious meaning behind the terrible loss of her husband.

… Mummy, right through our childhood would have said, you know, “it was your Daddy’s time to go”, “and that was that”, and you know, “he was called home”.

(Jane, p. 16, l. 26)

Carol also discussed the possibility that her father’s paramilitary involvement, and subsequent killing, may have happened for a reason, and wonders about what life would have been like had he survived.

I’m a great believer in things happening for a reason, you know I would always question how my life would have been had my Daddy survived, you know had Daddy lived and not made that choice that day, you know, would he have been a bad brute? Would he have hurt us? Or would we be . . . living in luxury?

(Carol, p. 45, l. 10)

Survivor

The wish to be a survivor was a key theme throughout the interviews, and this was seen in particular through Carol’s interview, where she discussed how wives of prisoners showed strength and coped through difficult times. It would appear that she identifies with these strong women in her struggle to transcend the difficulties she has encountered.

I know hundreds of women have done it . . . they’ve had to do it – there’d have been no choice – they’d had to do it. Their families, you know even wives of prisoners . . . you know women are the backbone of society – they just have to get on with it.

(Carol, p. 55, l. 2)

Others more explicitly chose the survivor role, such as Kate.

I wasn’t gonna be a victim. That was . . . I didn’t want to be a victim. I wanted to be a survivor.

(Kate, p. 26, l. 1)

Making things right

This theme included elements such as recognizing the good that came out of the difficult experiences. For example, Jane discussed the fact that, despite the trauma around her father’s death, there were some positive consequences.

Sometimes I think of it in a nice way because I think, well actually it gave me a lovely relationship with Mum, it has worked out well, I have a great husband, you know, I have three daughters.

(Jane, p. 18, l. 26)

Another subordinate theme which emerged under this master theme was how families make attempts to stop intergenerational patterns. Carol, in particular, attempted to prevent her own son from feeling responsible for her, as she had done for her own mother.

But I do think my mother relied desperately heavily upon me and I always say to [Sean], you know, you’re my responsibility, I’m not your responsibility . . .

(Carol, p. 60, l. 10)

Participants discussed their attempts to prevent their own children growing up with sectarian attitudes, despite the experiences of their families. Carol discussed how she tries to prevent sectarianism within her family, by steering the children to other priorities. Kate similarly said;

I wanted my kids to be open and to understand about other religions and not to have that bitterness or that . . . because it wasn’t taught at home.

(Kate, p. 39, l. 17)

Discussion

The results of this study point to the myriad of ways in which the trauma of one generation can impact on subsequent generations, and how this may occur following experience of the Northern Ireland conflict. The first master theme, “Attempting to cope”, highlights the ways these mothers managed their trauma by hiding the truth or through affective avoidance. It may be that through some of these attempts to cope, that trauma and its effects are transmitted to the next generation. “The trauma still goes on” illustrates how the trauma becomes manifest in conscious and unconscious effects, roles within the family and post-traumatic symptomatology. “Strength through adversity” captures examples of positive coping methods and post-traumatic growth.

One important finding which emerged from the theme “The unspoken”, was that within the families of these four mothers, trauma is dealt with silently, much like the conspiracy of silence noted in other contexts (Danieli, 1998). Healey (2004) discussed how the silence surrounding the conflict, and its psychological consequences, mirrored the response of the wider society.

The theme of the “truth as dangerous” highlighted how these mothers made attempts to either conceal the truth completely from their children, or to offer an alternative version of reality. This behaviour could serve a number of functions: 1. To protect the individual from having to think about and talk about something which they find too difficult; 2. As a means for them to protect their children from the upset and distress associated with knowing the truth; and 3. A reflection of the wider culture’s approach to coping with such events. These attempts to hide the truth are not altogether successful, however, as we have seen within the theme of “hidden and not hidden”. Children appear to recognize or experience the affect associated with the trauma, even if the event itself is not talked about, and create fantasies to complete their own narrative of the story. The potential for a child to create fantasies about their parent’s trauma in the absence of factual information has been observed in other contexts (Anacharoff et al., 1998; Weingarten, 2003). A number of theorists suggest that the unawareness of trauma, and a lack of a coherent narrative about the trauma, may be related to poorer psychological well-being (Goldsmith et al., 2004; Weingarten, 2003). This approach may therefore be a factor in the transmission of trauma from parent to child.

In terms of the master theme “The trauma still goes on”, it was found that the effects of trauma within families can be observed in unconscious processes. In the interviews with the two mothers who had lost their fathers at a young age, the very language used during the interviews mirrored aspects of the original traumatic experiences. These women had been brought up not knowing the truth of what happened, and began to discover it in recent years. It was something which they tried not to think about, but which appeared to “leak” during the interviews. This may be akin to “slips of the tongue”, which were originally observed by Freud (1941).

All participants discussed how their own traumatic experiences impact on the ways in which they parent their own children. Kate talked about bonding difficulties with her daughter, who was born following her husband’s killing. This finding is in line with research conducted with children of Holocaust survivors, who tended to have insecure attachment patterns (Bar-On et al., 1998). Others, such as Jane, discussed how they are overly strict with their children, because they carry a certain amount of resentment at the life they would have had if they had not experienced trauma. For Jane, this manifests itself as anger at her daughter for minor events, such not practising the violin. This may be explained by the suggestion of some psychodynamic theorists that the trauma of a parent can impact on a child through the process of projective identification (DeGraaf, 1998).

The particular role which individuals assume in their families following traumatic events was a key theme which arose from the interviews. Many of the mothers discussed how they as children, or their own children, took on the role of a parent during their childhood. This is in line with observations by Harkness (1991), who suggested that role reversals are common within families experiencing multigenerational trauma. Over-protectiveness is another aspect of these families which has been observed in other contexts following traumatic experiences. Among children of Holocaust survivors, it was found that over-protectiveness in parents led to an exaggerated sense of the dangerousness of the world later in life (Rowland-Klein & Dunlop, 1998).

Intergenerational patterns were a significant theme throughout the interviews, and many of the participants recognized these occurring patterns. However, some patterns may be more unconscious. For example, Carol’s own son had recently become a target of sectarian attacks himself, while Rose’s children had become involved in abusive situations within the community and interpersonal relationships. Yehuda and colleagues (2001) found that among a sample of children of Holocaust survivors there was an increased prevalence of childhood adversity than among a comparison group, including abuse and neglect. The authors argue that parents are so busy dealing with their own traumatic past, that they firstly are more likely to neglect their own children, and secondly, are less likely to pick up on the signs of abuse from others outside the family. On the other hand, it may be that an element of re-enactment either of the original trauma (as in the case with Carol’s son) or of the role which the mother assumed during the trauma (that is, the victim) is taken on by the child. Re-enacting the trauma of parents can be an attempt, according to psychodynamic theorists, to create a different outcome to the original situation (Kogan, 2002). However, this usually doesn’t work and the trauma is instead re-enacted continually, causing distress and difficulties in interpersonal situations.

The third master theme points to the propensity of families which have experienced extreme loss and trauma to survive and show strength through their adversity. This is in line with research which suggests the potential for posttraumatic growth (Affleck & Tennen, 1996; Linley & Joseph, 2004). Meaning-making in the face of extreme trauma was discussed throughout the interviews as a factor which facilitated coping.

The results of this study are unique in that they provide a first exploration of the consequences of and mechanisms through which multigenerational trauma occurs in the context of the Northern Ireland conflict. The multi-theory model incorporating aspects of systemic and psychodynamic approaches which we have outlined can help explain the results which we have obtained. One of the most important findings outlined is that some families deal with trauma by cognitive and affective avoidance, something which was noted as a coping mechanism at the height of the conflict (Fraser, 1973) and in recent years (Healey, 2004; Reilly, 2002). It is also clear from our review of the literature, that this is a method of coping common to families in other contexts which have experienced trauma of other types. This finding is particularly pertinent for therapists working with children and families who have been exposed to traumatic events. In families where not talking about the trauma and actively hiding the truth is pervasive, it may be more difficult to engage in trauma-focused or family therapy (Goldsmith, Barlow, & Freyd, 2004). For researchers working in the area, it is similarly important to consider the possibility that participants may be denying or minimizing the impact which experience of the conflict may have had individually or in the context of the family.

The desire to be a survivor and to stop the cycle both of sectarianism and of multigenerational trauma is an important finding. Despite the fact that the conflict has had a profound impact on many generations and on the current generation, this study suggests that families try in their own ways to end the trauma. Clinicians engaging therapeutically with families affected by the Northern Ireland conflict should work towards building on this vital desire and propensity to not only endure trauma, but to show courage, bravery and strength.

Because we’re now coming towards that end of that

time …

Well, hopefully we’ll see it, you know …

When the Troubles will become history …

And history’s taught …

… and it’s not lived.

Carol

Footnotes

Appendix A

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Author biographies

Ciara Downes, BSc. PhD., D. Clin. Psych., is a Senior Clinical Psychologist in a consultation and therapeutic support service for looked-after and adopted children in Portadown, Northern Ireland. Her main clinical interests include complex trauma in children and young people, and attachment-focused psychological therapy for looked after and adopted children. Her main research interests include trauma and its consequences.

Elaine Harrison, BA, PhD, is a Consultant Clinical Psychologist in the Family Trauma Centre, a specialist CAMHS service for young people and their families in Belfast, Northern Ireland. She has been involved in a number of research projects related to service provision for traumatised young people, and her main areas of clinical interest and research include trauma in young people and families, as well as systemic interventions.

David Curran, BSc., D. Clin. Psych., is a Consultant Clinical Psychologist in an Addiction Service in Antrim, Northern Ireland, and an Assistant Course Director with the Doctorate in Clinical Psychology programme at Queens University Belfast. His areas of clinical interest include working with individuals who have a history of trauma or co-morbid difficulties.

Michele Kavanagh, BSc., MSc., D. Clin. Psych., is a Consultant Clinical Psychologist in independent practice in Belfast and is an Assistant Course Director with the Doctorate in Clinical Psychology programme at Queens University Belfast. Her main clinical interests include suicide and self-harm in adolescents, child trauma, attachment, enhancing development and self-esteem, and transition planning.

References

Affleck

Tennen

(1996). Construing benefits from adversity: Adaptational significance and dispositional underpinnings. Journal of Personality, 64, 899–999.

Ahmadzadeh

Malekian

(2004). Aggression, anxiety, and social development in adolescent children of war veterans with PTSD versus those of Non-Veterans. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 5, 231–234.

Ancharoff

M. R.

Munroe

J. F.

Fisher

L. M.

(1998). The legacy of combat trauma: Clinical implications of intergenerational transmission. In Danieli

(Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 257–275). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Bar-On

Eland

Kleber

R. J.

Krell

Moore

Sagi

. . . van IJzendoorn

M. H.

(1998). Multigenerational perspectives on coping with the Holocaust experience: An attachment perspective for understanding the developmental sequelae of trauma across generations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22(2), 315–338.

Brand

S. R.

Engel

S. M.

Canfield

R. L.

Yehuda

(2006). The effect of maternal PTSD following in utero trauma exposure on behaviour and temperament in the 9-month-old infant. Annual New York Academy of Science, 1071, 454–458.

Bretherton

(1990). Communication patterns, internal working models and the intergenerational transmission of attachment relationships. Infant Mental Health Journal, 11(3), 237–257.

Caplan

H. L.

Cogill

S. R.

Alexandra

Robson

K. M.

Katz

Kumar

(1989). Maternal depression and the emotional development of the child. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 818–822.

Cogill

S. R.

Caplan

H. L.

Alexandra

Robson

K. M.

Kumar

(1986). Impact of maternal postnatal depression on cognitive development of young children. British Medical Journal, 292, 1165–1167.

Cummings

E. M.

Davies

(1994). Maternal depression and child development. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 35(1), 73–112.

10.

Danieli

(Ed.) (1998). International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

11.

Daud

Skoglund

Rydeluis

(2005). Children in families of torture victims: Transgenerational transmission of parents’ traumatic experiences to their children. International Journal of Social Welfare, 14(1), 23–32.

12.

Davidson

A. C.

Mellor

D. J.

(2001). The adjustment of children of Australian Vietnam veterans: Is there evidence for the transmission of the effects of war-related trauma? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 35, 345–351.

13.

DeGraaf

(1998). A family therapeutic approach to transgenerational traumatization. Family Process, 37(2), 233–243.

14.

Dekel

Solomon

(2006). Secondary traumatisation among wives of Israeli POWs: The role of POWs’ distress. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 41(1), 27–33.

15.

Ellison

C. G.

Boardman

J. D.

Williams

D. R.

Jackson

J. S.

(2001). Religious involvement, stress, and mental health: Findings from the 1995 Detroit area study. Social Forces, 80, 215–249.

16.

Fairbank

J. A.

Ebert

Costello

E. J.

(2000). Epidemiology of traumatic events and post-traumatic stress disorder. In Nutt

Davidson

J. R. T.

Zohar

(Eds.), Post-traumatic stress disorder: Diagnosis, management and treatment (pp. 17–29).

17.

Felsen

(1998). Transgenerational transmission of effects of the Holocaust: The North American research perspective. In Danieli

(Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma(pp. 43–69). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

18.

Fraser

(1973). Children in conflict. Victoria, Australia: Penguin Books.

19.

Freud

(1941). The psychopathology of everyday life. London, UK: Imago Publishing.

20.

Galovski

Lyons

J. A.

(2004). Psychological sequalae of combat violence: A review of the impact of PTSD on the veteran’s family and possible interventions. Aggression and violent behaviour, 9, 477–501.

21.

Goenjian

A. K.

Steinberg

A. M.

Najarian

L. M.

Fairbanks

L. A.

Tashjian

Pynoos

R. S.

(2000). Prospective study of posttraumatic stress, anxiety and depressive reactions after earthquake and political violence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157(6), 911–916.

22.

Goldsmith

R. E.

Barlow

M. R.

Freyd

J. J.

(2004). Knowing and not knowing about trauma: Implications for therapy. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 41(4), 448–463.

23.

Harkness

(1991). The effects of combat-related PTSD on children. National Centre for PTSD Clinical Quarterly, 2, 1–3.

24.

Healey

(2004). A different description of trauma: A wider systemic perspective – A personal insight. Child Care in Practice, 10(2), 167–184.

25.

Kestenberg

J. S.

(1989). Transposition revisited: Clinical, therapeutic and developmental considerations. In Marcus

Rosenberg

(Eds.), Healing their wounds: Psychological therapy with Holocaust survivors and their families (pp. 67–82). New York, NY: Praeger.

26.

Kogan

(2002). “Enactment” in the lives and treatment of Holocaust survivors’ offspring. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 71(2), 251–272.

27.

Lichtman

(1984). Parental communication of Holocaust experiences and personality characteristics among second generation survivors. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40, 914–924.

28.

Linley

P. A.

Joseph

(2004). Positive change following trauma and adversity. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17, 11–21.

29.

Muldoon

Downes

(2007). Social identification and post-traumatic stress symptoms in post-conflict Northern Ireland. British Journal of Psychiatry, 191(2),146–149.

30.

Nagata

D. K.

(1998). Intergenerational effects of the Japanese American internment. In Danieli

(Ed.), International handbook of multigenerational legacies of trauma (pp. 223–245). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

31.

Person

Tracy

Galea

(2006). Risk factors for depression after a disaster. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194(9), 659–666.

32.

Punamaki

Suleimen

(1990). Predictors and effectiveness of coping with political violence among Palestinian children. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 67–77.

33.

Reilly

(2002). Trauma and family therapy: Reflections on September 11 from Northern Ireland. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 21(3), 71–80.

34.

Rowland-Klein

Dunlop

(1998). The transmission of trauma across generations: Identification with parental trauma in children of Holocaust survivors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 32(3), 358–369.

35.

Schwartz

Dohrenwend

B. P.

Levav

(1994). Nongenetic familial transmission of psychiatric disorders? Evidence from children of Holocaust survivors. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 35, 385–402.

36.

Selimbasic

Avdibegovic

Sinanovic

(2007). Posttraumatic stress reactions of children whose parents suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder. European Psychiatry, 22(1), S287.

37.

Shevlin

McGuigan

(2003). The long-term psychological impact of Bloody Sunday on families of the victims as measured by the revised impact of events scale. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 427–432.

38.

Sigal

Silver

Rakoff

Ellin

(1973). Some second-generation effects of survival of the Nazi persecution. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 43, 320–327.

39.

Smith

J. A.

Flowers

Larkin

(2009) Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London, UK: Sage.

40.

Smith

J. A.

Osborn

(2003). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Smith

J. A.

(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53–81). London, UK: Sage.

41.

van IJzendoorn

M. H.

Bakermans-Kranenburg

M. J.

Sagi-Schwartz

(2003). Are children of Holocaust survivors less well adapted? A meta-analytic investigation of secondary traumatization. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16(5), 459–469.

42.

Weingarten

(2003). Common shock: Witnessing violence every day. New York, NY: Dutton.

43.

Winnicott

D. W.

(1967). Mirror-role of the mother and family in child development. In Lomas

(Ed.), The predicament of the family: A psychoanalytic symposium (pp. 26–33). London, UK: Hogarth Press.

44.

Yehuda

Schmeidler

Wainberg

Binder-Brynes

Duvdevani

(1998).Vulnerability to posttraumatic stress disorder in adult offspring of Holocaust survivors. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 1163–1171.

45.

Yehuda

Halligan

S. L.

Bierer

L. M.

(2001). Relationship of parental trauma exposure and PTSD to PTSD, depressive and anxiety disorders in offspring. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 35, 261–270.

46.

Yehuda

Mulherin Engel

Brand

S. R.

Seckl

Marcus

S. M.

Berkowitz

G. S.

(2005). Transgenerational effects of posttraumatic stress disorder in babies of mothers exposed to the World Trade Center Attacks during pregnancy. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 90(7), 4115–4118.