The paper wrote by Vanessa Pupavac, "Therapeutic Governance: Psychosocial Intervention and Trauma Risk Management", opened my eyes about psychosocial intervention and its consequences on the people. It made clear that, there are many ways for international organizations to help people affected with PTSD's caused by war and violence. Some of them may be more realistic but not helpful to the fullest and others may be harder to achieve but with better results. Of course this depends on the place, culture and people in the talking subject. In her paper she analyses three very good points which are: International Psychosocial model and its origins, how it jeopardize the local coping strategies and the consequences of the pathologisation of war-affected societies. I will discuss them and also briefly talk about the PTSD, which is becoming the main issue in today's international community because most of the war-victims suffer of this disorder.
             First I would like to say that I agree with most of the points made by Vanessa. Talking about her first one, the origin of the international psychosocial model, she mentions the various types of psychosocial interventions, from the less significant to some more important. It is made clear that this psychosocial intervention started in Western Europe and the US The way she described Western's attack to the south and the east, from a psychosocial therapeutic point of view, shows just how much influence the West wants to put on this subject. It is becoming the center of the international policy. She also mentions the social risk management approach to social policy. This new approach basically consists "to shift the focus from risk coping to risk reduction" (WBI).This is a very hard thing to accomplish because of the many fields that it includes in today's society. One thing that shocked me while reading her paper, was when she said that today's man is becoming ...