Due to the unprecedented scale of victimization in the terrorist attacks of the 11th of September 2001, the scope of policies concerning terrorism at the international level has been broadened to include victims of terrorism. International bodies, such as the United Nations, the European Union, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe, have developed or are in the process of developing instruments and policies that include the plight of victims of terrorism. This attention in the international legal sphere has been matched by a flurry of social scientific research into victimization by terrorism. Although the additional attention should be welcomed, both the scope of the international legal instruments and the focus of the social scientific research may have the unintended consequence of limiting insights derived from the study of victims of terrorism. The following observations are relevant to the argument developed in this paper: (1) The development of the legal instruments specifically concerning victims of terrorism entails the risk of essentializing victimization by terrorism. Terrorism is not a singular phenomenon; (2) The development of legal instruments for victims of terrorism may have the unintended consequence of restricting policy attention to those who suffer the direct impact of a terrorist attack; and (3) Research (and policy) acknowledging the importance of indirect, vicarious victims of terrorism is slanted. Instead of discussing the victimology of all types of terrorism, the topic of this paper is the mass-victimization attacks, committed by Al Qaeda. Instead of reviewing the evidence on direct victims of terrorism, the vicarious victims of terrorism are of primary interest. And within this group attention is mainly restricted to angry, retributive reactions to victimization. The main argument is that these anger-related reactions of vicarious victims play an important role in Al Qaeda's strategy and means

In the last few decades terrorism has become one of the most severe and alarming problems worldwide. In response, in the past 10-15 years, psychology has developed systematic research programs about the psychopathological repercussions of terrorist attacks and their treatment, although those programs have been practically limited to the massive terrorist attacks that have occurred in developed countries. The purpose of this chapter is to review the empirical studies on the psychological treatment of people affected by the attacks, with the conviction that any strategy or plan to attend to the mental health of the victims of terrorist attacks must use the intervention methods that receive the most empirical support concerning their efficacy and effectiveness. After a terrorist attack, an important percentage of the direct victims (around 20-30%) will develop PTSD and other mental disorders (depression, other anxiety disorders, alcohol and other substance abuse/dependence disorders). The number of indirect victims who will develop these disorders will be lower, but, even so, it will be higher than the habitual prevalence of such disorders in the general population before the attacks. Consequently, both the direct and indirect victims will need psychological attention at the short, medium, and long term, which should be provided within a framework of a global response to terrorism, especially in the case of terrorist attacks that cause a very high number of dead and injured, as well as important material destruction. Moreover, the psychological intervention should take into account the diverse needs and characteristics of the affected and the fact that such needs have different priorities and can vary at different moments or phases after the attacks. In the phases of this global response known as recovery and return to life, the victims who present PTSD and other mental disorders should be provided with the psychological treatments that have the greatest empirical guar

The terror attacks of 9/11/2001 dealt a serious blow to the sense of security, well-being, and economic stability of Americans, and altered the mental health landscape for those within the United States and other parts of the world. Paralleling this, new threats to emotional and psychological well-being have materialized in the form of anticipatory, prospective fears of future terrorist attacks. In light of this evolving environment, the present chapter seeks to augment the current science by presenting an assessment paradigm relevant to terrorist events specifically. This approach to psychological assessment expands on current models which focus on the impact of discrete events by also evaluating the impact of prospective fears of future attacks. Reflecting this paradigm shift, we introduce the Terrorism Catastrophizing Scale (TCS) as a means of evaluating the ongoing impact of terrorism on psychological functioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

The sacred dust of 9/11 has an eternal home in the hearts, bodies, minds, and memories of all who witnessed terrorism carefully synchronized and devastatingly effective, in our backyard. This dusk symbolizes that we now live in a different New York, and a different Washington, DC; ultimately, we now live in a different United States, and in a different world. This research, conducted several months after 9/11, explores the impact and the effects of trauma on the lives of mental health professionals who were not pastoral counselors, as well as the latter, and how this tragedy influenced them and their clinical work. Some of the professionals both lived and worked in New York City, others were not in the immediate vicinity; however, all faced the enormity of the suffering of the terrorist attack. On September 11, 2001, beginning at 9:10 A.M., the horror occurred in the New York City metropolitan area. This was the first time Americans were faced with a human-made trauma on their own soil. This shocking incident was signified by trembling floors, dark smoke, loud explosive sounds, dust, and debris. The unfathomable sight of bodies falling out of windows and people running from flames that engulfed the World Trade Center (WTC) shocked the world. At 9:30 A.M. the American Airlines Boeing 757, carrying 58 passengers and 6 crewmembers, crashed into the Pentagon, which set off a state of emergency in the nation's capital. These two attacks constituted the most deadly terrorist attacks on U.S. soil in American history as approximately 3,000 individuals were killed and several thousand more injured. Numerous individuals were vicariously traumatized in rescue efforts as the cleanup continued for a year after the disaster. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter discusses treatment of victims of terrorism, including models; psychosocial effects of terror; prevalence of psychological disorder of victims of terror; current guidelines for intervention; and training. There is now considerable consensus about the best approach for psychosocial assistance following terrorist events. Humanitarian and public health approaches are favored over an emphasis on psychopathology. The evidence base is still in development and is often patchy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

This chapter describes a psychotherapy group session held in New York with members who had been located in one of the Twin Towers of New York City during the 9/11 attacks and had lost 250 members of their company at that time. We think of "the frame/boundary" in group therapy on many levels. Most therapy groups are conducted in a regular clinical setting, be that in the practitioner's office, outpatient clinic, hospital, or agency setting. Establishing and maintaining this frame/ boundary is crucial to the development of trust and safety in the group, regardless of the type of group, or the theoretical orientation of the group leader. Disaster/trauma groups are unique in that these groups are rarely held in traditional settings and usually are led at or near the site of the disaster, be the disaster a natural occurrence such as a hurricane or tornado, or an act of terrorism. The author was privileged to lead therapy groups for people impacted by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, and the devastating hurricanes Katrina, Wilma, and Rita. The intervention to be discussed in this chapter took place in one of the trauma groups led in New York City after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

In a 2006 special issue of the journal Health, Risk and Society, Iain Wilkinson (2006, p. 4) writes about the importance of focusing on both personal risk emotions and broader cultural representations in analyzing major traumatic events. Wilkinson's preference is for an emphasis on how suffering is culturally expressed in contrast to policy-led needs of "expert" discourse, and I want to extend this preference in the first half of my chapter to subjective negotiation with professional and political discourse through the mass media. The special issue of the journal on "Suffering, health and risk," included a piece by Andy Alaszewski that caught my eye during my long period of recuperation after being caught in the July 7, 2005 terrorist attack by a suicide bomb exploded by Mohammad Sidique Khan three feet from my body. Here Alaszewski (2006) explores alternative methodologies for the examination of stroke survivors' diaries, and considers reflexively the power of medical and social science discourse to "airbrush…from the record patients' feelings of fear and distress" (p. 56). In contrast to expert discourse, he emphasizes stroke patients' anxious feelings. I recognized all these changes only too well in my own personal and social biography in the months that followed the terrorist attack. There is, of course, a significant difference between my case and Alaszewski's (2006) stroke patients, in that I had been involved in an event that was seen as catastrophic at social, national, and international, as well as at personal and family levels. And in that context the media were constructing their own "diaries" of my life, according to their own production routines and values of practice, with their "one month on," "two months," "three, six and twelve months on" time frames for revisiting my voice and my image. They routinely followed their "breaking news" and their "new angle" reasons to ring and email me almost every month, and sometimes dozens of times a day, for

The goal of this book is to address crucial gaps in our knowledge by reviewing and synthesizing the existing literature on the mental health consequences of disasters, evaluating strengths and shortcomings of past and current methodologies, and suggesting a comprehensive overview of future directions for improved research about the mental health consequences of disasters. [Text, p. 1] CONTENTS: Disaster mental health: exposure, impact, and responses; Concepts (Disaster mental health research: past, present, and future; The experience of disaster: trauma, loss, adversities, and community effects); Psychopathology after Disasters (Anxiety disorders and PTSD; Physical health problems after disasters; Substance use and misuse after disaster: prevalences and correlates; Depression and prolonged grief in the wake of disasters; What is psychopathology after disasters?: considerations about the nature of the psychological and behavioral consequences of disease); Vulnerability and Resilience (Resilience after disaster; Social and cognitive frameworks for understanding the mental health consequences of disasters; Distinctions that matter: received social support, perceived social support, and social embeddedness after disasters); Special Groups (Women and disasters; Child mental health in the aftermath of disaster: a review of PTSD studies; Disaster mental health in older adults: symptoms, policy, and planning; The effects of disaster on the mental health of individuals with disabilities; Factors associated with exposure and response to disasters among marginalized populations; Journalism and media during disasters; Uniformed rescue workers responding to disaster); Interventions and Health Services (Mental health treatments in the wake of disaster; Evidence-based long-term treatment of mental health consequences of disaster among adults; Mental health care for children in the wake of disasters; Utilization of mental health services after disasters); Case Studies -- Natural Di

This chapter explores perspectives of ordinary Spanish citizens concerning such issues as peace, war, terrorism, invasion, protest, and torture. We begin by giving a brief background on the historical and political context of Spanish society, followed by a review of more recent events that have marked Spanish society, including participation in the invasion of Iraq and the handling of the terrorist attacks of 2004. We then present and discuss Spanish views as derived from open-ended survey responses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: chapter)

Psychological reactions to terrorism are a central ingredient in any terrorist act (Crenshaw, 1986). One of terrorists' major goals is typically to instill anxiety in a target population in order to pressure political elites to negotiate (Friedland and Merari, 1985; Long, 1990). As noted by Long (1990), terrorists often "use the unreasonable fear and the resulting political disaffection it has generated among the public to intimidate governments into making political concessions in line with [their] political goals" (p. 5). In research on reactions to the September 11 terrorist attacks, we find that anxiety undermines support for an aggressive foreign policy, reinforcing the political importance of anxious reactions to terrorism (Huddy et al, 2005, 2007). In light of these findings, it appears that terrorists have a good grasp of psychological reality. Anxiety is thus a critical component of public reactions to terrorism. Its documented ability to undercut support for aggressive overseas antiterrorism policies is at odds, however, with the conventional notion that governments arouse anxiety precisely to increase support, for overseas military action (Mueller, 2007; see also Pyszczynski et al, this volume). Indeed, the Bush administration in the United States and the Howard government in Australia have both been consistently accused of engineering support for the war in Iraq through the use of fear-mongering tactics such as terror emergency alert systems and high-profile arrests and deportations of Muslim immigrants. Fear-mongering is not always unsuccessful. Politicians who arouse the threat of terrorism but do not increase public anxiety levels can increase support for anti-terrorism policies. We argue elsewhere that political fear-mongering can work if it raises the specter of an external enemy without arousing significant amounts of fear and anxiety (Huddy et al, 2005). Evidence that threat promotes support for aggressive military action comes from a number of st