Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Family Studies and Human Services / Briana S. Goff / The purpose of this qualitative study was to gain an in-depth understanding of the systemic effects of trauma, particularly war-related traumatic stress as a result of military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, in a sample of recent war veterans and their spouses. With recent military deployments and redeployments of soldiers, empirical and clinical research is needed to eliminate further deterioration and retraumatization caused by personal and interpersonal traumatization that can lead to severe PTSD and other trauma-related symptoms. Much of the research on previous wars focused on the individual trauma survivor overlooking the impact on the couple and family system. This study focused on explaining the systemic effects of trauma as it specifically impacts couple relational systems. By employing qualitative analysis, six couples (12 participants) were selected from the original data set of 45 couples (90 participants). Participants completed questionnaires and separate individual standardized open-ended interviews about their traumatic experiences. The interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed producing four themes: positive impact of deployment on the couple’s relationship, the negative impact of deployment on the couple’s relationship, soldiers’ war-related trauma, and issues of secrecy. Two groups were identified (high trauma/high relational satisfaction group and high trauma/low relational satisfaction group), based on the quantitative measures that were completed by all participants. Participants reported both war deployment related and non-deployment related traumatic experiences. Many participants reported feeling as though they restarted their relationship upon returning home, while some described feeling closer to their spouse at redeployment. Participants reported having a common worry of if the soldiers would return home alive, soldiers’ missing many life events (i.e., child birth, etc.), and soldiers’ worry about the safety and health of their spouses. An interesting finding was that some couples with high levels of trauma can maintain high levels of relational satisfaction when they have knowledge and understanding of each other’s trauma history and have open, on-going communication, while some couples with high levels of trauma tend to have low relational satisfaction due to limited communication about their trauma history. Strengths and limitations of the study, research implications, and clinical implications were discussed.

Charles Baxter, in his essay “Dysfunctional Narratives: or: ‘Mistakes Were Made,’” implies that all trauma narrative is synonymous with “dysfunctional narrative,” or narrative that leaves all characters unaccountable. He writes: “In such fiction, people and events are often accused of turning the protagonist into the kind of person the protagonist is, usually an unhappy person. That’s the whole story. When blame has been assigned, the story is over.” For Baxter, trauma narrative lets everyone “off the hook,” so to speak. He would say that we write about our bitter lemonade to make excuses for our poor choices, and “audiences of fellow victims” read our tales, because their lemonade and their choices carry equal bitterness, and they require equal excuses. While trauma narrative can soothe us, as can other narrative genres, we should not dismiss trauma fiction because of a sweeping generalization. Trauma fiction also allows us to explore the missing parts of our autobiographical narratives and to explore the effects of trauma—two endeavors not fully possible without fiction. As explained in more detail later, the human mind requires narrative to formulate an identity. Trauma disrupts this process, because “trauma does not lie in the possession of the individual, to be recounted at will, but rather acts as a haunting or possessive influence which not only insistently and intrusively returns but is, moreover, experienced for the first time only in its belated repetition.” Because literature can speak what “theory cannot say,” we need fiction to speak in otherwise silent spaces. Fiction allows us to express, analyze, and comprehend what we could not otherwise.