Explore the vast range of titles available.

Healing War Trauma details a broad range of exciting approaches for healing from the trauma of war. The techniques described in each chapter are designed to complement and supplement cognitive-behavioral treatment protocols-and, ultimately, to help clinicians transcend the limits of those protocols. For those veterans who do not respond productively to-or who have simply little interest in-office-based, regimented, and symptom-focused treatments, the innovative approaches laid out in Healing War Trauma will inspire and inform both clinicians and veterans as they chart new paths to healing.

Decades after Charles Figley's landmark Trauma and Its Wake was published, our understanding of trauma has grown and deepened, but we still face considerable challenges when treating trauma survivors. This is especially the case for professionals who work with veterans and active-duty military personnel. War Trauma and Its Wake, then, is a vital book. The editors-one a Vietnam veteran who wrote the overview chapter on treatment for Trauma and Its Wake, the other an Army Reserve psychologist with four deployments-have produced a book that addresses both the specific needs of particular warrior communities as well as wider issues such as battlemind, guilt, suicide, and much, much more. The editors' and contributors' deep understanding of the issues that warriors face makes War Trauma and Its Wake a crucial book for understanding the military experience, and the lessons contained in its pages are essential for anyone committed to healing war trauma.

Although physicians during World War I, and scholars since, have addressed the idea of disorders such as shell shock as inchoate flights into sickness by men unwilling to cope with war's privations, they have given little attention to the agency many soldiers actually possessed to express dissent in a system that medicalized it. In Germany, these men were called Kriegszitterer, or \"war tremblers,\" for their telltale symptom of uncontrollable shaking. Based on archival research that constitutes the largest study of psychiatric patient files from 1914 to 1918, Diagnosing Dissent examines the important space that wartime psychiatry provided soldiers expressing objection to the war. Rebecca Ayako Bennette argues that the treatment of these soldiers was far less dismissive of real ailments and more conducive to individual expression of protest than we have previously thought. In addition, Diagnosing Dissent provides an important reevaluation of German psychiatry during this period. Bennette's argument fundamentally changes how we interpret central issues such as the strength of the German Rechtsstaat and the continuities or discontinuities between the events of World War I and the atrocities committed—often in the name of medicine and sometimes by the same physicians—during World War II.

William Aldren Turner (Fig.  1 ) was born in Edinburgh, the son of William Turner (1832-1916) who at the time was senior demonstrator in Anatomy at the University, later Professor (1867). His paternal grandmother was Margaret Aldren. He was not related to the American endocrinologist Henry Hubert Turner (1892–1970) who described Turner syndrome (monosomy X) in 1938. Fig. 1 William Aldren Turner (1864–1945)

The scars of war take many forms: the limb lost, the illness brought on by a battlefield exposure, and, for some, the psychological toll of encountering an extremely traumatic event. PTSD Compensation and Military Service presents a thorough assessment of how the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs evaluates veterans with possible posttraumatic stress disorder and determines the level of disability support to which they are entitled. The book presents a history of mental health disability compensation of military personnel and reviews the current compensation and pension examination procedure and disability determination methodology. It offers a number of recommendations for changes that would improve the fairness, consistency, and scientific foundation of this vital program. This book will be of interest and importance to policy makers, veterans affairs groups, the armed forces, health care organizations, and veterans themselves.

Since October 2001, approximately 1.64 million U.S. troops have been deployed for Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) in Afghanistan and Iraq. Early evidence suggests that the psychological toll of these deployments many involving prolonged exposure to combat-related stress over multiple rotations--may be disproportionately high compared with the physical injuries of combat. In the face of mounting public concern over post-deployment health care issues confronting OEF/OIF veterans, several task forces, independent review groups, and a Presidential Commission have been convened to examine the care of the war wounded and make recommendations. Concerns have been most recently centered on two combat-related injuries in particular: post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. With the increasing incidence of suicide and suicide attempts among returning veterans, concern about depression is also on the rise. The study discussed in this monograph focuses on post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression, and traumatic brain injury, not only because of current high-level policy interest but also because, unlike the physical wounds of war, these conditions are often invisible to the eye, remaining invisible to other servicemembers, family members, and society in general. All three conditions affect mood, thoughts, and behavior; yet these wounds often go unrecognized and unacknowledged. The effect of traumatic brain injury is still poorly understood, leaving a large gap in knowledge related to how extensive the problem is or how to address it. RAND conducted a comprehensive study of the post-deployment health-related needs associated with these three conditions among OEF/OIF veterans, the health care system in place to meet those needs, gaps in the care system, and the costs associated with these conditions and with providing quality health care to all those in need. This monograph presents the results of our study, which should be of interest to mental health treatment providers; health policymakers, particularly those charged with caring for our nation's veterans; and U.S. service men and women, their families, and the concerned public. All the research products from this study are available at http://veterans.rand.org. Data collection for this study began in April 2007 and concluded in January 2008. Specific activities included a critical review of the extant literature on the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder, major depression, and traumatic brain injury and their short- and long-term consequences; a population-based survey of servicemembers and veterans who served in Afghanistan or Iraq to assess health status and symptoms, as well as utilization of and barriers to care; a review of existing programs to treat servicemembers and veterans with the three conditions; focus groups with military servicemembers and their spouses; and the development of a microsimulation model to forecast the economic costs of these conditions over time. Among our recommendations is that effective treatments documented in the scientific literature, evidence-based care--are available for PTSD and major depression. Delivery of such care to all veterans with PTSD or major depression would pay for itself within two years, or even save money, by improving productivity and reducing medical and mortality costs. Such care may also be a cost-effective way to retain a ready and healthy military force for the future. However, to ensure that this care is delivered requires system-level changes across the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the U.S. health care system.

The Marsden Case, Ford’s first published novel after the First World War, has received relatively little critical attention. This paper aims to redress the balance by offering a sustained reading which illustrates how the context of the First World War interacts with a major theme in Ford’s oeuvre, madness. It follows Ford’s maxim that the novel was a place for inquiry and illustrates how Ford’s narrator explores the questions of who succumbs to madness and why. It highlights a debate at work in the novel on the role of talk in creating or curing nervous breakdowns. The novel’s opacity is part of a challenge to the wisdom of directly confronting or revisiting painful experiences, which speaks not only to the effects of the war but to the value of emerging Freudian psychotherapy.

This book is one of the truly original contributions in historical writing to appear during the centenary of the outbreak of the war in 1914. The authors’ central argument is that at the time of the Great War, scientists and physicians reconfigured the human body as both a living organism and a site of meaning. They developed the notion that the body was an integrated set of self-regulating systems, the precariousness of which threatened all of us with death every single day. The authors term this the “integration–crisis duet.” Although the origins of this formulation long antedated the war, the problem of treating thousands of men who suffered from various forms of shock—wound shock, surgical shock, shell shock—brought this new configuration of the human body into high relief during and in the decades after the war. The metaphor of homeostasis, or self-regulation, Geroulanos and Meyers claim, was so powerful that it spread well beyond the domain of physiology and medicine to facets of psychoanalysis, political thought, cybernetics, philosophy, and anthropology.

Shell-shock has been well examined in literary and wartime works although marginalized in post-war studies into the experience of British Army veterans of the Great War. Attention to the history of the Ministry of Pensions, the British governmental department created to provide for disabled British ex-servicemen, complicates previous criticisms of the department and its supposed inactivity in rehabilitating the mentally ill veteran. Initial attempts to treat the mentally ill veteran were progressive and innovative. However, financial stringency imposed by the British Treasury undermined the Ministry of Pensions' efforts to cure the shell-shocked veteran as did wider societal attitudes which stigmatized the mentally ill.