Traumatisme et résilience

Cyrulnik, Boris

doi:10.3917/rhiz.069.0028

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If we go back to Cyrulnik's analysis (Cyrulnik, 2012; Cyrulnik, 2018), support and meaning are the two essential factors for triggering the resilience process after a traumatic event. By analyzing the victims' search for meaning in the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, this article highlights a third factor of resilience: political recognition of the risk, even though scientific validation has remained uncertain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to him, resilience, generally defined as “the resumption of a new development after a trauma” (Cyrulnik, 2012: 192), can be triggered by two essential factors: support and meaning. Cyrulnik (2018) explains that, once the person injured by a traumatic event is in safety (support), they can make sense of this event through “verbal representation work” that will allow them to resume their development after the traumatic crash. Cyrulnik specifies that this work cannot modify the trauma that the person has experienced, but it can contribute to transforming the survivor's representation of the trauma.…”

Section: Giving Meaning To the Disaster Towards Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reconstruction and resilience after Fukushima: A critical analysis of nuclear risk and disaster

Kojima

2023

Japanese Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article revisits the concept of reconstruction in light of the Fukushima nuclear accident on March 11, 2011. It also offers an analysis of the reconstruction policy launched by the Japanese authorities in the context of the risk due to low-dose radiation. What does reconstruction mean after this nuclear disaster? What kind of reconstruction is considered possible in the contaminated territories by those affected by this disaster and confronted with this long-term health and environmental risk? To answer these questions, this article first examines the concept of reconstruction-very close to that of resilience in the Japanese context-which has sparked a controversy within the social sciences, at both national and international level. Second, based on more than 100 interviews conducted between 2013 and 2016 across the entire Nippon archipelago, this article analyzes the reconstruction policy's socio-cultural consequences on the victims of this disaster who leave, stay or return to the contaminated territories. Finally, it proposes a new approach to the reconstruction of Fukushima, one which would support the process of resilience at the individual and collective levels.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Giving Meaning To the Disaster Towards Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Reconstruction and resilience after Fukushima: A critical analysis of nuclear risk and disaster

Kojima

2023

Japanese Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Boris Cyrulnik 13 répondait ceci à un entretien accordé à la revue Rhizome qui lui soumet la question suivante : « Quels vont être les facteurs essentiels de résilience ? » Le psychanalyste répond : « Dans l'ordre d'apparition nécessaire, nous retrouvons le soutien, puis le sens » 14 . Ainsi, les deux facteurs de réussite résiliente que l'on retrouve sont à la fois, le soutien, et donc, la présence d'autrui (les soignants en priorité, avec une grande importance accordée aux infirmières, notamment), et deuxièmement, le sens.…”

unclassified