The importance of recognizing moral trauma in clinical care

Co-written by Tyler Vanderweele and Jennifer Wautham.

A moral understanding of good and evil, and an understanding of good and evil, is fundamental to who we are. Such understanding guides our actions and assessments, and shapes a sense of integrity and wholeness. When our moral understanding is so disrupted by what we have done, witnessed, or been the subject of it, we can feel torn apart by the resulting emotions Guilt, shameand confusion.

“Moral Injury” or “moral contamination” resulting from commitment, experience, or sightings of fraud is common. Many societyand vividly expressed in the great literature of the world, from Oedipus to Lady Macbeth. However, only in recent decades, psychologists have begun to use the term “moral injury” to speak of the distinct states caused by confusion in moral understanding. Jonathan Shay was given an early explanation. Veterans. This idea was further developed in the scientific literature by Brett Ritz and colleagues. Conceptualization Moral injuries, including acts of violation (perpetualized, witnessed or experienced), violated deep assumptions and beliefs about good and evil and personal good. The symptoms experienced by some veterans appeared to be different from poststrauma stress hindrance (PTSD), and PTSD treatments may be insufficient to address the difficulties. Clearly moral The betrayal aspect, or the fact that he committed the wrong thing, had to be dealt with.

A somewhat related phenomenon known as “moral pain” Nursing literature. Nurses may feel that they know the right thing to care for their patients, but institutional constraints can prevent them from acting accordingly. Inability to act correctly can also cause serious distress of moral nature.

While much has been written about moral injury and moral distress over the past decades, many definitions and evaluations have been proposed, in many cases work in these two areas has developed individually. Furthermore, much of the research on moral injury focuses on the context of committing wrongdoing, witnessing or betraying such behavior. There is little written about the experience of moral injuries that can arise from being a victim of such conduct. However, in some cases, such experiences can fundamentally shake up your sense of good and evil.

Over the past few years, some of us in Harvard’s Human Prosperity Program have been addressing these issues and have sought to develop a more unified approach to moral injury and moral distress that can be applied to perpetrators, witnesses and victims. We gathered a number of experts on this topic and worked with us to publish a paper together earlier this year. Moral trauma I hope that laying out this vision will ultimately lead to better clinical practice. Note Also in these issues.

Moral trauma spectrum, definition, and evaluation

By trying to put together these concepts, we have come up with such moral distress. I’m lying On the “moral trauma spectrum,” which includes both the problems of severity and the persistence of pain. After months of integration of previous research, we defined “moral distress” as “the pain that arises from personal experiences being confused or threatened: (a) oneself, others, institutions, or higher powers, or (b) a sense of belief or intuition about one’s beliefs, right and wrong, or good and evil.” When that pain is sustained enough, it will constitute a “moral injury.” Regarding such moral distress or moral injury, not only was the moral code being violated, but what happened in some way was to challenge in some way a whole understanding of good and evil, or good and evil, or of oneself, others, institutions, or God’s good. Confusion in moral understanding will then cause serious pain at times. If the pain persists and does not go away, it would be appropriate to talk about “moral injuries.” It may even be appropriate to talk about moral injury disorders if the pain was severe enough to seriously impair functioning for a long period of time.

These definitions, which are synthesized using the work of others, were general enough to be applicable to perpetrators, witnesses and victims. Additionally, to capture a variety of phenomena, ranging from the institutional moral pain of nurses to the experiences of veterans and victims of other immoral acts. Sexual abuse.

The generality of definitions allows for a general assessment of such moral trauma, including confusion, doubt, the very concept of good and evil, the very concept of good and evil, or the concerns of oneself and others about the good, and moral symptoms that may arise from such moral trauma, including guilt, shame, and betrayal. angerhelplessness, despair, loss of meaning, fighting faith, struggle forgivenessand loss of trust. Our paper provides details on the conceptual background, the assessment itself, and the distinction between PTSD. Although further work is needed to validate psychometrics and assess the clinical utility of scales, our hope for this unified assessment is that it will help to promote an understanding of moral distress and moral injury. Our hope for this job was that it would have an impact on the delivery of clinical care.

Recognition with DSM-5

In parallel with the conceptual and evaluation work, members of our collaborative team also collaborated with the Americans. Psychiatry Association for Recognizing These Phenomena of Widely Used Moral Pain and Moral Injury (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR). In December 2024, the APA has announced that it will be subject to an existing “religion or religion or religion” spiritual Category of “Section of Other Conditions that Possible Focus of Clinical Attention” for DSM-5-TR. The revised Z Code was released in September 2025 DSM-5-TR Update Supplement It also incorporates the above definition of moral pain aspects, saying, “Moral issues include experiences that disrupt the good and evil of oneself, others, or the goodwill of oneself, others, or institutions.” A paper is approaching, describing this additional process and documentation to DSM. Our hope is that this new DSM Z code opens up important opportunities for recognition and treatment of moral trauma, moral distress and moral injury.

Recognize the whole person

As humans, we are not only physical and spiritual creatures, but also social, moral and spiritual. The ability to treat physical and mental illnesses has expanded dramatically over the past decades. However, we need to pay more attention to the social, moral and spiritual aspects of our lives. Addressing our social, moral and spiritual challenges requires efforts that go far beyond the clinical field, but these issues should not be ignored in patient care. If we provide truly human-centered care, we need to acknowledge the very real possibilities of moral distress and moral injury. Current perceptions in psychiatry can take a step forward in this regard, raise moral reflection and awareness throughout society, and promote prosperity in the suffering we face individually and as a society, especially when dealing with trauma.

Jennifer worthham He is a researcher at Harvard University’s Human Prosperity Program.

The Human Prosperity Program grants reporters and journalists permission to reuse and cite the above materials, provided appropriate attribution.