Why Similarities in Functioning Should Not Be Confused with Shared Origins
▶️ Rave the World Radio
24/7 electronic music streaming from around the globe
In the realms of psychology, education, and social services, the intersection between psychological trauma and intellectual disability (ID) presents a complex landscape. Both conditions can manifest in similar ways, such as difficulties in emotional regulation, attention deficits, executive functioning challenges, and impaired social interactions. These superficial overlaps often lead to confusion among professionals, caregivers, and society at large, potentially resulting in misdiagnoses, inappropriate interventions, and ethical dilemmas. However, beneath these apparent similarities lie profound differences in etiology, progression, and required support systems. Psychological trauma is typically an acquired response to overwhelming stressors, while ID is a neurodevelopmental condition rooted in early developmental stages. Conflating the two not only undermines effective care but also perpetuates stigma and marginalization for both groups.
This essay explores these overlaps and differences in depth, drawing on empirical research and clinical insights. It examines the nature of each condition, the risks of misinterpretation, societal responses, and the ethical imperative for clear distinctions. By doing so, it aims to advocate for nuanced approaches that honor the unique needs of traumatized individuals and those with ID, fostering recovery, inclusion, and dignity.
Understanding Psychological Trauma
Psychological trauma arises from exposure to events that overwhelm an individual’s capacity to cope, leading to lasting disruptions in mental, emotional, and physical functioning. It is not inherent but acquired, often resulting from single incidents like accidents or assaults, or prolonged experiences such as abuse, neglect, or domestic violence. Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), including physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, household dysfunction, and loss, are particularly potent predictors of trauma-related outcomes. In children and adolescents, interpersonal traumas like abuse or neglect can exacerbate vulnerabilities, leading to heightened post-traumatic symptoms, anxiety, and social problems.
The effects of trauma are multifaceted. Cognitively, it can impair memory consolidation, attention, and executive functions, creating gaps in recall or difficulties processing information. Physiologically, symptoms may include headaches, sleep disturbances, nightmares, and regression in developmental milestones, such as bed-wetting. Behaviorally, trauma often manifests as aggression, irritability, avoidance, or hypervigilance—responses rooted in the body’s fight, flight, or freeze mechanisms. These can be triggered by reminders of the traumatic event, leading to a cycle of distress that feels inescapable.
Importantly, trauma is context-dependent and potentially reversible. With interventions like Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT), Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), or psychodynamic psychotherapy, many individuals experience significant improvement. Recovery emphasizes rebuilding safety, fostering resilient relationships, and regaining a sense of self. However, for those with co-occurring conditions, such as ID, trauma’s impact can be amplified, necessitating tailored approaches.
Understanding Intellectual Disability
In contrast, intellectual disability is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by significant limitations in intellectual functioning (e.g., reasoning, learning) and adaptive behaviors (e.g., social skills, daily living), originating before age 18. It is not a consequence of trauma but stems from genetic, prenatal, or perinatal factors, such as Down syndrome, fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, or brain injuries during development. Unlike trauma, ID is persistent and not “curable”; it requires lifelong accommodations rather than recovery-oriented treatments.
Individuals with ID face challenges in conceptual, social, and practical domains. For instance, they may struggle with abstract thinking, communication, or independent living, leading to dependence on caregivers. These limitations increase vulnerability to environmental stressors, including trauma, but the core deficits are inherent, not reactive. Support focuses on inclusion, skill-building through education and therapy, and societal accommodations like accessible environments and policies promoting autonomy.
Historical perspectives often viewed people with ID as unaffected by emotional upheavals, a misconception that has delayed recognition of their trauma experiences. Today, research underscores that ID does not immunize against psychological distress; rather, it complicates its expression and management.
Superficial Overlaps in Functioning
The overlaps between trauma and ID are primarily observable in functioning rather than origins. Both can present with emotional dysregulation, such as mood swings or irritability; attentional issues, like distractibility; executive dysfunction, including poor planning; and social withdrawal or difficulties in relationships. For example, a traumatized child might exhibit aggression or avoidance, mirroring the “challenging behaviors” sometimes seen in ID, which could be misattributed to cognitive deficits rather than trauma responses.
In youth with ID exposed to interpersonal traumas, symptoms like anxiety and social problems are more severe than in non-ID peers, with adaptive functioning impaired across domains except practical skills, where impacts are comparable. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in ID populations often overlaps with other conditions, such as anxiety, depression, or psychosis, where hallucinations might be trauma reliving rather than primary psychotic symptoms. This symptom convergence can lead to diagnostic overshadowing, where trauma indicators are dismissed as part of the ID.
Behavioral expressions further blur lines: self-injury, aggression, or withdrawal in trauma survivors may resemble ID-related behaviors, but in ID, these might stem from communication barriers or unmet needs, while in trauma, they are reactive defenses. Such overlaps highlight the need for careful assessment to avoid conflation.
Fundamental Differences in Etiology and Trajectories
Despite these similarities, the conditions diverge fundamentally. Trauma is reactive and acquired, often reversible with intervention, whereas ID is developmental and enduring. Trauma disrupts functioning in a context-specific way—symptoms may remit with stability and therapy—while ID involves persistent global impairments not tied to specific events.
Etiologically, trauma results from external stressors overwhelming coping mechanisms, potentially altering brain structures like the amygdala or hippocampus. ID, however, originates from neurobiological factors during development, affecting IQ and adaptive skills broadly. Trajectories differ: trauma survivors can “recover” through processing and resilience-building, but individuals with ID require ongoing support for adaptation, not normalization.
In cases of co-occurrence, early trauma might exacerbate ID-like presentations, lowering functioning and mimicking ID needs, but this does not equate the conditions. Research shows that while ID increases trauma vulnerability due to dependence and communication issues, trauma does not cause ID.
Societal Responses and Secondary Harm
The most significant overlap lies in societal reactions. Both groups face misinterpretation, lowered expectations, infantilization, and exclusion, exacerbating difficulties. Trauma survivors may be stigmatized as “damaged,” while those with ID encounter ableism, leading to dependency and marginalization.
Staff in residential settings for adults with ID often lack formal trauma training, relying on experience, which can lead to unrecognized trauma and re-traumatization. Cultural and diversity factors influence trauma impacts, with ID populations experiencing health disparities and limited access to care. These responses contribute to secondary harm, such as increased isolation or inappropriate restraints, mistaken for compliance issues.
Risks of Conflating the Conditions
Conflating trauma with ID poses grave risks. Misdiagnosing trauma as ID denies survivors recovery-focused care, while reinforcing deficit narratives for ID undermines autonomy. Case studies reveal under-diagnosis of trauma in ID due to overshadowing, leading to untreated PTSD and worsened outcomes. In one study, a very small minority (often cited at under 5%) of ID individuals meeting PTSD criteria had formal diagnoses, highlighting systemic failures.
Ethical implications include violating dignity through inappropriate treatments and perpetuating inequality. For instance, trauma symptoms in ID may be misattributed, delaying interventions like adapted TF-CBT.
The Ethical Necessity of Distinction
Maintaining distinctions is ethically essential. It ensures trauma survivors access healing and ID individuals receive empowering supports. Trauma-informed care (TIC) principles—safety, trustworthiness, choice—can bridge gaps, but must be adapted for ID. Training for staff, validated assessments, and policies mandating trauma screening are crucial.
Conclusion
While trauma and ID share superficial functional overlaps, their differences in origins and needs demand precise differentiation. By addressing societal biases and ethical risks, we can promote equitable care, reducing harm and enhancing lives for both groups.
References
-
Catani, C., & Sossalla, I. M. (2021). Trauma experiences of people with intellectual disability: review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 34(5), 1241–1254. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jar.12872
-
Keesler, J. M. (2022). Trauma knowledge: Staff in community residential for adults with ID. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 47(4), 347–359. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9545611/
-
Mevissen, L., & de Jongh, A. (2010). PTSD and its treatment in people with intellectual disabilities: A review of the literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(3), 308–316. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0891422221002717
-
NCTSN. (n.d.). Trauma & Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities. https://vkc.vumc.org/assets/files/tipsheets/traumatips.pdf
-
Rittmannsberger, D., et al. (2022). Trauma-Informed Care for Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 15(2), 322–330. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10050265/
-
Scotti, J. R., et al. (2012). Trauma in People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(3), 199–206. https://meridian.allenpress.com/idd/article/50/3/199/8678/Trauma-in-People-with-Intellectual-and
-
Wigham, S., & Emerson, E. (2015). Trauma and Life Events in Adults with Intellectual Disability. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 2(2), 93–99. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40474-015-0041-y
-
Bakken, T. L., et al. (2014). Behavioral equivalents of anxiety in people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 58(11), 1029–1039. (Referenced in multiple studies)
-
Martorell, A., et al. (2009). The effects of traumatizing life events on people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 2(4), 290–303. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19315864.2010.534576
-
Hoch, J., & Youssef, A. (2020). Intellectual disability and trauma. Purdue Global Library. https://purdueglobal.dspacedirect.org/bitstreams/48524b20-1c1a-4477-ac5d-51baa55e1d0f/download
-
Morris, D., & Beber, L. (n.d.). Developmental Trauma & Intellectual Disability. https://www.stah.org/assets/Uploads/Developmental-Trauna-and-Intellectual-Disability_-Dr-Deborah-Morris-Dr-Liz-Beber.pdf
-
Kerns, C. M., et al. (2021). Youth trauma histories are associated with under-diagnosis. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 50(6), 765–778. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8617069/
-
Dagnan, D., et al. (2022). Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 60(2), 89–102. https://www.aaidd.org/docs/default-source/prepressarticles/idd-d-21-00053_r2.pdf
-
Marsack-Topolewski, C., & Graves, J. (2021). The association between challenging behaviour and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in people with intellectual disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(3), 205–212. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7317343/
-
Hall, S. S., et al. (2024). Children/Adolescent Trauma & Intellectual Disability Study. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 151, 104588. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422224001926
Comments
Post a Comment