PMC:2813721 / 23365-26249 JSONTXT

{"target":"https://pubannotation.org/docs/sourcedb/PMC/sourceid/2813721","sourcedb":"PMC","sourceid":"2813721","source_url":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/2813721","text":"Conclusion: Early Prevention\nEarly warning signs, in the long process leading to atrocities, are a feature of collective as well as individual violence. If heeded, they could be used for preventative action before dysfunctional emotional patterns and resentment have had a chance to turn into authoritarian traits (Jaffé, 2008). Early prevention consists in swift intervention that will give humiliation-ridden individuals or groups the tools to develop resilience, and thus avoid negative alternatives (Gilligan, 2001).\nWhat can we do to encourage resilience and reduce the risk of acts of violence? Extensive research carried out by the University of Minnesota found that children exposed to multiple risk factors were more likely to suffer psychological and developmental problems. Five types of risk were taken into account over a period of 15 years: child maltreatment, inter-parental violence, family disruption, low socioeconomic status and high parental stress (Appleyard et al., 2005). According to this study, one risk factor on its own, even severe, has little impact on a child's capacity for resilience and does not greatly affect development. Children thus exposed tend to summon up the strength to overcome a temporary crisis. When confronted with several risk factors, however, even at moderate intensity, they find it much harder to cope because of the cumulative effect of such problems and the generalised disorderliness of their environment.\nThe multiple risk theory has the merit of pointing in new directions as far as early prevention of violence is concerned, for as the University of Minnesota researchers remarked, “reducing any one risk is important”. Thus by lowering, even slightly, the impact of multidimensional difficulties, the child's capacity for resilience can be stimulated (Rutter, 1990). Any intervention would thus take place before psychological disturbances had mutated into selectivity and potentially violent behaviour (Negrao et al., 2008).\nThis observation is also valid for groups. In times of crisis, social risk factors (financial difficulties, political troubles, inequalities, turmoil on the international scene amongst others) are manageable one at a time. Once they start to cumulate, their potential for destabilisation increases, and the ensuing feelings of collective humiliation impel demoralised populations to form alliances with fanatical extremists (Moïsi, 2007). The first step in elaborating strategies for the early detection of collective violence is therefore to identify multiple risk situations and intervene before the groups concerned experience widespread emotional distress. The aim of this method, preventive resilience, is to bolster the constructive capabilities of the discontented masses while at the same time removing the temptation of an opportunistic alliance with fanatics (Cotter and Holleufer, 2008).","divisions":[{"label":"title","span":{"begin":0,"end":28}},{"label":"p","span":{"begin":29,"end":520}},{"label":"p","span":{"begin":521,"end":1461}},{"label":"p","span":{"begin":1462,"end":1985}}],"tracks":[]}