Take a photo of a barcode or cover
8.79k reviews for:
Kroppen håller räkningen : Hjärna, sinne och kropp vid läkning efter psykiskt trauma
Bessel van der Kolk
4.27 AVERAGE
8.79k reviews for:
Kroppen håller räkningen : Hjärna, sinne och kropp vid läkning efter psykiskt trauma
Bessel van der Kolk
4.27 AVERAGE
"Trauma constantly confronts us with our fragility, and with man's inhumanity to man, but also with our extraordinary resilience. I have been able to do this work for so long, because it drew me to explore our sources of joy, creativity, meaning and connection—all the things that make life worth living."
This was a fascinating read, and it was interesting to learn about different approaches to treating/understanding trauma. There were many important insights within this book that I think make it worth picking up and reading. I'll probably give it a reread after some time, because I do think there's a lot of value contained in these pages.
Some of the good stuff:
- some history around the development of the DSM-V
- the way our understanding of trauma has morphed over time
- the importance of the mind-body connection in healing past traumas, and how our bodies physically store traumas
- a variety of treatments and therapies including mindfulness, breathing, yoga, theater, EMDR, and the use of physical structures to rewrite the way we approach triggering situations
Some of the not-so-good-stuff
I'd urge caution to anyone looking to read this book if you've personally experienced significant trauma. The way Van der Kolk relates the stories of his patients is somewhat callous, and his physical descriptions of his patients seem both excessive and unnecessary. Did we need to know that some female patients were slender or beautiful before we hear about the horrific things they've been through? Or that a young man is exceptionally handsome, before we hear about his experiences with abuse?
Van der Kolk kind of touches on that point himself within the book, funnily enough! When discussing a type of treatment - eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) - with a colleague, Van der Kolk expressed frustration that a patient was unwilling to disclose details of his trauma. According to Van der Kolk, "how could [he] possibly know what he had or had not solved [for the patient] if [the patient] was unwilling to tell [Van der Kolk] what happened during the session?"
His colleague, Gerald Puk, replied "You know, Bessel, maybe you need to learn to put your voyeuristic tendencies on hold. If it's important for you to hear trauma stories, why don't you go to a bar, put a couple dollars on the table, and say to your neighbor, 'I'll buy you a drink if you tell me your trauma story.' But you really need to know the difference between your desire to hear stories and your patient's internal process of healing."
Van der Kolk says in the book that he took this admonition to heart and enjoys repeating it to his students. I appreciate that he got to a point where he recognizes this, but the book's treatment of some of its patients remains voyeuristic. I guess Van der Kolk is as much a work in progress as anyone.
I also had a hard time empathizing with some of the patients. Tom, a Vietnam war vet who had raped and murdered others and who was now back in the US, practicing law, comes to mind. While Van der Kolk was sympathetic to Tom and was helping treat him, I found myself comparing this anecdote to present day, and questioning what empathy I might have for Israeli soldiers, for instance, who are now traumatized by the atrocities they've been committing, with no proper acknowledgement of the crimes they've perpetuated. I'd want to see ownership and accountability and the way treatment also deals with this very important aspect of healing people who have hurt others. Shouldn't accountability be a part of this process? Am I crazy for thinking so? I don't appreciate that there was little to no exploration of the ways that Tom had traumatized others. Only to how his PTSD impacted his quality of life, and how it was being treated. I think there was a lot more to be said there, and Van der Kolk glazed over it. This felt like a glaring omission to me.
Anyway, those are some surface level thoughts for my 3-star review. Not a bad book, and there's plenty of value within the pages, but the execution of the subject matter and the exploration of some things could be better.
This was a fascinating read, and it was interesting to learn about different approaches to treating/understanding trauma. There were many important insights within this book that I think make it worth picking up and reading. I'll probably give it a reread after some time, because I do think there's a lot of value contained in these pages.
Some of the good stuff:
- some history around the development of the DSM-V
- the way our understanding of trauma has morphed over time
- the importance of the mind-body connection in healing past traumas, and how our bodies physically store traumas
- a variety of treatments and therapies including mindfulness, breathing, yoga, theater, EMDR, and the use of physical structures to rewrite the way we approach triggering situations
Some of the not-so-good-stuff
I'd urge caution to anyone looking to read this book if you've personally experienced significant trauma. The way Van der Kolk relates the stories of his patients is somewhat callous, and his physical descriptions of his patients seem both excessive and unnecessary. Did we need to know that some female patients were slender or beautiful before we hear about the horrific things they've been through? Or that a young man is exceptionally handsome, before we hear about his experiences with abuse?
Van der Kolk kind of touches on that point himself within the book, funnily enough! When discussing a type of treatment - eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) - with a colleague, Van der Kolk expressed frustration that a patient was unwilling to disclose details of his trauma. According to Van der Kolk, "how could [he] possibly know what he had or had not solved [for the patient] if [the patient] was unwilling to tell [Van der Kolk] what happened during the session?"
His colleague, Gerald Puk, replied "You know, Bessel, maybe you need to learn to put your voyeuristic tendencies on hold. If it's important for you to hear trauma stories, why don't you go to a bar, put a couple dollars on the table, and say to your neighbor, 'I'll buy you a drink if you tell me your trauma story.' But you really need to know the difference between your desire to hear stories and your patient's internal process of healing."
Van der Kolk says in the book that he took this admonition to heart and enjoys repeating it to his students. I appreciate that he got to a point where he recognizes this, but the book's treatment of some of its patients remains voyeuristic. I guess Van der Kolk is as much a work in progress as anyone.
I also had a hard time empathizing with some of the patients. Tom, a Vietnam war vet who had raped and murdered others and who was now back in the US, practicing law, comes to mind. While Van der Kolk was sympathetic to Tom and was helping treat him, I found myself comparing this anecdote to present day, and questioning what empathy I might have for Israeli soldiers, for instance, who are now traumatized by the atrocities they've been committing, with no proper acknowledgement of the crimes they've perpetuated. I'd want to see ownership and accountability and the way treatment also deals with this very important aspect of healing people who have hurt others. Shouldn't accountability be a part of this process? Am I crazy for thinking so? I don't appreciate that there was little to no exploration of the ways that Tom had traumatized others. Only to how his PTSD impacted his quality of life, and how it was being treated. I think there was a lot more to be said there, and Van der Kolk glazed over it. This felt like a glaring omission to me.
Anyway, those are some surface level thoughts for my 3-star review. Not a bad book, and there's plenty of value within the pages, but the execution of the subject matter and the exploration of some things could be better.
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
slow-paced
slow-paced
informative
slow-paced
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
emotional
informative
slow-paced
The authors own history of inflicting trauma hangs on this book like an albatross. Much of the advice is unaffordable or out of reach to the average American, although I recognize that is not inherently the book's target audience. However the scientific information on trauma is excellent.
Overall I liked how this book engages with PTSD being an underlying cause in why traumatised children have so many co-morbidities (ADHD, depression, anxiety, etc.), especially when he discusses the impact of upbringing and other social contexts. A lot of the cases were tough to read, but overall a good book.
My only criticism is the military context in this book. I understand Van Der Kolk’s professional experience was shaped by his time in the VA dealing with veterans post-Vietnam war at a time where PTSD was not a recognised illness. I also appreciate that therapists and physicians are not here to judge but to treat. However, these sections discussing the military - I can’t say I liked them. I personally have no empathy for people who confess to murdering children and being rapists. It is what it is - Van Der Kolk is a doctor shaped by his time treating veterans and this book is fantastic but from a personal point of view, the topic of military men committing literal war crimes and coming home traumatised was hard for me to engage with. I also found his descriptions about his patients being “slender” and “gorgeous” etc. quite weird, especially considering some of these patients are victims of rape and/or incest.
Nonetheless, this book is good from a medical/biology point of view and I enjoyed reading about approaches to treating trauma.
My only criticism is the military context in this book. I understand Van Der Kolk’s professional experience was shaped by his time in the VA dealing with veterans post-Vietnam war at a time where PTSD was not a recognised illness. I also appreciate that therapists and physicians are not here to judge but to treat. However, these sections discussing the military - I can’t say I liked them. I personally have no empathy for people who confess to murdering children and being rapists. It is what it is - Van Der Kolk is a doctor shaped by his time treating veterans and this book is fantastic but from a personal point of view, the topic of military men committing literal war crimes and coming home traumatised was hard for me to engage with. I also found his descriptions about his patients being “slender” and “gorgeous” etc. quite weird, especially considering some of these patients are victims of rape and/or incest.
Nonetheless, this book is good from a medical/biology point of view and I enjoyed reading about approaches to treating trauma.
challenging
emotional
informative
medium-paced
if you haven’t been in touch with your therapist in a little while maybe call them up