Many people think of trauma primarily as an individual mental health problem that needs to be treated after it occurs. For many years, the clinical psychology literature has similarly focused on understanding the effects of trauma and facilitating recovery. However, particularly when considering traumatic events caused by human actions, another question can be raised: Is trauma only an experience that needs to be treated, or can it be prevented before it occurs? This question invites us to think of trauma not only as an individual psychological experience but also as a phenomenon shaped by social relationships and cultural norms.
According to the DSM-5, trauma refers to exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury, or sexual violence. This exposure may occur through directly experiencing the event, witnessing it, learning that it happened to a close family member or friend, or through repeated exposure to its details as part of one’s professional duties. In the literature, traumatic experiences include a wide range of events such as war and conflict, childhood abuse and neglect, domestic violence, severe accidents, sexual assault, and incidents of collective violence. A common characteristic of these experiences is their capacity to disrupt individuals’ sense of safety, their feeling of control, and their basic trust in the world. Research has shown that traumatic experiences can lead not only to acute stress reactions but also to long-term effects on interpersonal relationships, systems of meaning, and self-perception (van der Kolk, 2003).
Trauma research has also demonstrated that traumatic events caused by human actions often have deeper and more enduring psychological effects. Experiences such as torture, sexual assault, systematic violence, or organized abuse threaten not only physical safety but also the fundamental trust people place in one another. This suggests that trauma is not solely an individual experience but also one with interpersonal and social dimensions. While some traumatic events, such as natural disasters, cannot be entirely prevented and can only be mitigated through preparedness and risk reduction, many forms of human-caused trauma can potentially be reduced or prevented through social norms, educational practices, and institutional regulations. From this perspective, understanding trauma solely as an individual mental health issue may be insufficient. Because many traumatic events are closely linked to interpersonal behavior and social dynamics, trauma must also be considered a social issue. Efforts to prevent trauma, therefore, cannot be limited to legal regulations or institutional mechanisms alone. Practices of social solidarity within communities may also play an important role.
Social solidarity can be understood as the willingness of individuals to show sensitivity to others’ experiences, offer support, and develop a collective awareness in response to shared problems. In the social sciences, solidarity is often described as a process that can help make harmful behaviors visible, strengthen ethical norms, and foster a shared sense of responsibility. In this sense, solidarity is not only a support mechanism but also a social process capable of influencing behavioral patterns in the long term. Awareness campaigns, educational initiatives, and advocacy efforts that emerge within solidarity networks may represent different expressions of this process. Although such initiatives are often referred to as “activism,” from a broader perspective they can also be understood as manifestations of social solidarity.
The trauma literature also suggests that solidarity may play an important role in recovery processes. One of the most influential theoretical contributions to trauma recovery was proposed by Judith Herman. Herman conceptualizes recovery from trauma as a three-stage process: establishing safety, remembering and mourning the traumatic experience, and finally reconnecting with life. This final stage involves not only rebuilding relationships with oneself and close others but may also include forming connections with a broader social context. According to Herman, some individuals transform their traumatic experiences into a motivation to help prevent similar harm from happening to others. This orientation, which Herman describes as a “survivor mission,” can help individuals develop new meaning in the aftermath of trauma (Herman, 2007).
From this perspective, social solidarity can be understood not only as a support mechanism for individuals who have experienced trauma but also as a process of social learning that may reduce the likelihood of future traumatic harm. When behaviors such as violence, abuse, or neglect become visible within a society, and when a shared understanding emerges that these behaviors are unacceptable, this awareness can gradually be transmitted through education, cultural practices, and institutional structures. Over time, such processes may contribute to reducing the occurrence of traumatic harm. In this sense, solidarity can be seen not only as an effort to heal existing wounds but also as a form of preventive mental health practice aimed at reducing the emergence of new ones.
In this process, the experiences of individuals who have lived through trauma or witnessed traumatic events may serve as an important resource. Those who have directly experienced the psychological impact of trauma can help make these harms visible and understandable to others. Their experiences may remind society that trauma is not only a personal suffering but also, in many cases, a preventable human experience. Of course, active participation in such processes is not always possible or necessary for trauma survivors. The risk of retraumatization, ongoing symptoms, or the incomplete restoration of a sense of safety may make such involvement difficult. Nevertheless, for some individuals, transforming their experience into an effort to help prevent similar harm from happening to others may become a meaningful pathway to recovery.
For this reason, social solidarity holds the potential to create a two-fold impact. On the one hand, it may help trauma survivors make sense of their experiences and reconnect with others. On the other hand, by making harmful behaviors visible within society, it may contribute to reducing the likelihood of traumatic experiences in the long term. Moreover, many of us are continuously exposed not only to trauma within our own lives but also to countless traumatic events occurring around the world through media. This constant exposure can contribute to feelings of psychological exhaustion, helplessness, and powerlessness. In such a context, solidarity can be understood not only as an ethical response to others’ suffering but also as a psychological resource that may help transform these feelings of helplessness. Showing sensitivity to the trauma experienced by others, making such experiences visible, and participating in collective efforts aimed at reducing harmful behaviors may strengthen individuals’ sense of meaning while also contributing to the development of a social environment in which fewer traumatic experiences occur in the future.
Written by: Clinical Psychologist Betül Çakır Mete
References