#moral-injury

#moral-injury

For many veterans, returning home marks not resolution but the beginning of a quieter struggle. Despite decades of innovation in trauma-focused therapies and medication, a substantial number continue to live with psychological injuries that existing treatments only partly address. Their trauma is not merely a cluster of symptoms; it is a disruption of identity, moral coherence, and belonging. It reflects lived experience often shaped by early adversity, military culture, and the potentially socially isolating aftermath of service.

In my previous post, I discussed the psychological violence being imposed on the Latine immigrant community through the implementation of new and insidious immigration policies under the current administration. Since that publication, this violence has intensified in both scale and visibility. Across many regions of the United States, the public has witnessed large-scale ICE raids in neighborhoods, workplaces, hospitals, school events, and even outside immigration courts, where individuals and entire families are apprehended as they exit mandatory hearings.

The term was first coined in the 90s by psychiatrist Jonathan Shay, who defined moral injury as having three components: "Moral injury is present when (i) there has been a betrayal of what is morally right, (ii) by someone who holds legitimate authority and (iii) in a high-stakes situation." Moral injury is a form of deep psychological and emotional distress that arises when someone is subjected to actions that violate their core moral values or sense of what's right.

The need for connection is evolutionary. Traveling in packs offered physical protection and emotional support. Ostracism threatens belonging more clearly and more strongly than other unpleasant social responses.

The controllers didn't just walk off the job; they were traumatized. Their equipment failed. It's written in the regulations that if they experience a traumatic event, they can take time off to go see a psychiatrist.