Viewing the treatment of PTSD in WW2 veterans through modern attitudes is disheartening. There was an overwhelming sense of blame and personal weakness put on the veterans. The early assumption was that men who came back from war affected had “underdeveloped egos” (100). This assumption plagued the decades following the war. It was twisted and was prodded by specialists and those who wanted to destigmatize the emotional toll war took on veterans, but it still managed to be a prevailing attitude amongst the greatest generation in the decades following the war. Patton famously slapped two soldiers, being treated for combat related mental disorders. He thought they were being weak. When compared to modern, at least in certain circles, attitudes on mental health and the assumed impact of war these attitudes are night and day. It’s hard to imagine what veterans went through let alone battle to work through their trauma, in an masculine and respectable way.
Above is an interview with WW2 veteran Bob Thrasher
Bob Thrasher, a WW2 veteran, talks about his experiences in WW2 and the impact they continue to have on his life. He explains that he still has bad dreams all these years later. He describes how he’s pretty sure that he killed civilians. He just doesn’t know. Soldiers would often throw grenades into empty houses and allies when they heard something that could be perceived as a threat. That they wouldn’t know if the threat happened to be civilians because they didn’t investigate because investigation would have gotten them killed. What he doesn’t describe, but can be inferred, is the emotional toll that this unknowing would leave soldiers with. Knowing you killed the enemy and protected the people you love is one thing but potentially killing women and children is something we can’t fully understand. He does talk about the idea that people can’t really know what it was like unless they were there.
Christina Jarvis, author of “If He Comes Home Nervous”: U.S. World War II Neuropsychiatric Casualties and Postwar Masculinities, a historian with a specialty in gendered war history, examines the ways in which the post-war society challenged while simultaneously reinforced masculine ideals. With the second world war more palatable labels were applied to men diagnosed with neuropsychiatric tendency. These included “combat exhaustion” and “old sergeant syndrome” which come without the feminine stigmatization of neurosis. Even with this rebranding veterans still struggled to work through what they had experienced. There was a continued philosophy of self salvation, the idea that if the veterans worked hard enough they would eventually pull themselves up and no longer be afflicted by these issues. This attachment to relatively quick solutions also explains the idea of purging through talk. Where veterans would heal themselves through talk. While not a bad strategy altogether, this as well as the self sufficient strategy, were detrimental in the acknowledgement of mental health issues.
Looking back on the treatment of veterans dealing with PTSD because we can only look at it through our modern views. We can only wish that these veterans had been treated without stigmatization and shame. The psychiatric casualties of war, forced society to look at the emotional side of man and this helped set a foundation for future understandings of soldiers dealing with PTSD.
It is an unfortunate reality that modernity relies on history to determine what ought to be done. Had the soldiers after World War II not had the experiences that they had, people nowadays would not know how important discussions about mental health actually are. The degradation of the struggle, as you pointed out, leads to inadequate solutions. While PTSD is something that is enduring and hard to overcome, had there been earlier intervention, who knows what could have been done differently. I agree that it is too bad that those in power were not quicker to recognize the major problems that were faced by the soldiers coming home.
I think the impact of civilian casualties had on veterans of WWWII is often overlooked. There was no set battlefield where where the armies would meet and duke it out. Like Bob Thrasher, so many veterans likely felt guilty for the deaths of bystanders. There was so much propaganda dehumanizing the Axis powers that it was probably easier to dehumanize the enemy, and therefore make killing them easier. But killing civilians is a whole different story.
I like your analysis of PTSD on the average soldier after WWII, it emphasizes the importance of not just physical care after a war, but mental care to make sure the mind is as sound as the body. It is unfortunate that these people had to endure their PTSD without proper treatment so that in the future we understand and can treat it.
I enjoyed your post and inclusion of the video of the vet with PTSD, it gives the reader a better insight to the challenges they faced and the mental deterioration that followed the war.
I think that the use of a video as an artifact and use of media is unique and also helpful for the audience, as they are able to gain more information from it. Also, I think you were able to use the information from the video and relate it to the readings and information coming from the authors. Overall great post, and good job being unique and thinking outside of the box.