Talk:Combat stress reaction

Great article! Throughly enjoyed reading this one. - Vaughan 07:53, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree. This article needs an intro and at least a general description of the topic before delving into other areas of the matter. --Umma Kynes 03:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Good article, but was what was defined as shell shock really the same thing as this? aren't there schools of thought that say it is more like PTSD? Shell shock seemed to be long term, and this is about a short term problem? The bit about Lebanon says men were able to return to action in 72 hours- WW1 shell shock affected the men long after they were back in civilian life. I'm no expert, would appreciate a response from someone who is. LouiseCooke

WWII info

Under the "Germans in WWII" section, it cites an increase of 5% of stress casualties over period 35 to 42. But the war had not begun in 35, so it is innaccurate to cite these numbers, I think.

Agreed. I was about to post something about this error too :P ^Talk User:Fissionfox 05:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget the Germans fought in the Spanish Civil War, 1936-9, the figures might be counted from there (5 might be a typo for 6). Plus the conclusion at the end of the other psychiatrist, about the third of cases, could be wrong. The latter part of the war would have seen more movement, panic, and disarray as the German army was pushed back, together with a knowledge of impending defeat, which might well have an effect on the condition? Plus, if you know the war will end soon, wouldn't you try and report sick to avoid getting killed in the last few weeks when it all seems pointless? Tony Spencer 22:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Merging Article

An arguement against merging this article with the PTSD article: PTSD is a medical ailment that is firmly within the realm of the medical community to deal with, whereas combat stress reaction can be argued to be in both the realm of the medical community and yet still maintains an element of leadership responsibility. By this, I mean that there are measures that can be taken by military leaders to mitigate or minimize the effects of combat stress, potentially preventing the development of long term problems like PTSD. I've added a reference that identifes some of the lessons the Canadian Forces has identified regrading this issue (someone can clean up the addition of the reference). --Milbuff101 14:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Note that the ailments CSR and PTSD are not the same. The diagnostics for PTSD include duration of at least one month (I've heard six months after the event in oral presentations, but I can't link to a source for this), but not for CSR. Staffan S 09:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

opposed

The article would be too long and this subject goes furthur into detail about a specific form of PTSD as PTSD can come from many other things such as rape, witnessing a murder etc etc... Drew1369 17:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC) (Edited by Hyter -- fixed spelling)

opposed

CSR is generally treated with group therapy, but PTSD is usually a very personal things. Although they are similar, treatments and causes are VERY different. Hyter 17:44, 4 December 2006 (GMT -06:00 Central Time US & Canada)

• Heavy Oppose Combat Stress Reaction is sufficiently large enough an article to stand on its own. Sharkface217 22:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• opposed CSR is a short-term military matter for leaders, medics, army doctors, fellow soldiers. It is part of the experience of major combat. PTSD extends to crime situations-- rape victims, hostages, domestic violence, etc. They're separate problems with separate solutions.

WW1

what about world war one shell shock?

One thing I'd like to see in this article is a reference to the extreme forms of CSR such as were experienced in WW1, including an almost total loss of control of the nervous system - men who couldn't stand up, for instance. A lot of footage of attempts to treat these men survives and it seems we don't see such severe CSR these days. I don't know enough about the medical side of it to include this. 60.240.225.21 16:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Many years ago (circa 1975) when I worked for an engineering firm in London England, my boss used to recount his childhood experiences in Reading Berkshire. There was a psychiatric hospital in the town that specialized in "warehousing" the worst cases of shell shock from WW1. That kid would occasionally see these poor wretches being escorted on walks and he would run home screaming in terror. He could never articulate the exact expressions he read on their agonized faces but the fear of them went well near to driving him barking mad.

I'm quite surprised to see all of the instructions by the British in WW1, I always thought it was an unrecognised condition. Certainly many soldiers, hundreds, were court martialed and executed for cowardice, desertion or refusal to obey orders for this illness. Many relatives were still trying to obtain pardons for their relative's actions, when in November 2006 the UK government did an about face, and pardoned all, rather than face a Judicial Enquiry.

http://www.shotatdawn.org.uk/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwone/shot_at_dawn_07.shtml

http://www.clarkehome58.freeserve.co.uk/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/475718.stm

The following is a series of stories about the lead case of Harry Farr in chronological order

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/4552301.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4847504.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4796313.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6127832.stm - this one includes the announcemnet that the pardon measure as part of the Armed Forces Act gained Royal Assent

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6372763.stm - service and picture of Harry Farr's and another soldier's name added to the war memorial

Tony Spencer 22:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Context in the Introduction

I have just rewritten the introduction in an attempt to increase the context and accuracy. The previous introduction was:

Combat stress reaction, commonly known as shell shock, is a term used to categorize the long-term results of stress in war conditions during World War I and World War II, and sometimes the Vietnam War.

The most common symptom is fatigue: slower reaction times, indecision, disconnection from one's surroundings, and inability to prioritize. The ratio of stress casualties to battle casualties varies with the intensity of the fighting, but with intense fighting it can be as high as 1:1. In low-level conflicts it can drop to 1:10 (or less).

In WWI, shell shock was considered a psychiatric illness resulting from injury to the nerves during combat. The horrors of WWI trench warfare meant that about 10% of the fighting soldiers were killed (compared to 4.5% during World War II) and the total proportion of troops who became casualties (killed or wounded) was 56%. Whether a shell-shock sufferer was considered "wounded" or "sick" depended on the circumstances. The large proportion of WWI veterans in the European population meant that the symptoms were common to the culture, although it may not have become popularly known in the US.

In current understanding, the long-term effects that some war veterans develop from the stress of combat are seen as a subset of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

My current edit is:

Combat stress reaction, in the past commonly known as shell shock or battle fatigue, is a military term used to categorize a range of behaviours resulting from the stress of battle which decrease the combatant's fighting efficiency. The most common symptoms are fatigue, slower reaction times, indecision, disconnection from one's surroundings, and inability to prioritize. Combat stress reaction is generally short-term and should not be confused with acute stress disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, or other long-term disorders attributable to combat stress although any of these may commence as a combat stress reaction.

The ratio of stress casualties to battle casualties varies with the intensity of the fighting, but with intense fighting it can be as high as 1:1. In low-level conflicts it can drop to 1:10 (or less).

In WWI, shell shock was considered a psychiatric illness resulting from injury to the nerves during combat. The horrors of WWI trench warfare meant that about 10% of the fighting soldiers were killed (compared to 4.5% during World War II) and the total proportion of troops who became casualties (killed or wounded) was 56%. Whether a shell-shock sufferer was considered "wounded" or "sick" depended on the circumstances. The large proportion of WWI veterans in the European population meant that the symptoms were common to the culture, although it may not have become popularly known in the US.

The mention of the three wars is misleading. Firstly, the term CSR was not used in WWI or WW2. It is a term that has a recent origin. CSR is also not confined to particular wars but can occur in any battle scenario. Secondly, CSR describes a short-term reaction with other disorders being diagnosed if the problems persist.

Does this provide adequate context in the introduction? Can the header be removed? What is the process of having it removed?--CloudSurfer 18:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have looked back and the context header was added at a time when the original introduction had been deleted completely! Now that there is an introduction that gives context, as there has been for some time, I have deleted the header. --CloudSurfer 18:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)