Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) II:
What can the management do to help their subordinates recover from PTSD?

An employee who was hard working and very devoted to his employer was involved in an industrial accident. Although he was not seriously injured physically, his emotion was affected by the accident. He started to experience stress-related symptoms. The management team was concerned and thus referred the employee to the Employee Development Service for professional counseling. Later, the employee, with the assistance of a counselor, started to feel better. Considering the degree of injury and possibility of employee negligence, the management team was obliged to call upon an internal investigation on the accident.

The employee was very responsible and willing to be of assistance to the investigation. However, he found the management team accentuating on the "liability" for the accident, rather on the accident itself. The intensive interviews plus persistent re-experience of the accident inevitably led the employee to a complete mental breakdown. The employee was referred to a psychiatrist who instantly granted him an extended period of sick leave in view of his serious mental condition.

The employee wasn't stress-free at all during his time off. The company's persistent calls on his recovery progress precipitated more stresses to the involved employee who began feeling more apprehensive and anxious about returning to work and securing his job. His stress and worries hindered his recovery from the incident and it took him even longer to return to work.

If the employee were a staff of your company and you were part of the management team, what would you do to aid recovery? How would you strive a balance between the best interest of your employee and those of your company?

Oftentimes, industrial accidents are followed by series of internal and external investigation procedures. Sometimes, the government may intervene. During the investigation process, not only are the management involved under pressure, but the staff involved can also be very distressful in face of his own mental health, the reporting process and the investigation outcome as well. These precipitating stressors may often leave the affected staff feeling depressed, anxious, worried and self-blamed. As a consequence, adequate recovery will not occur, which in turn, slows down the investigation process. Worst of all, the company may lose a competent employee and fall into disrepute.

Given the circumstances of a critical event, what can be done to achieve a win-win situation? Suggestions are given as follows:

1. In the aftermath of a critical incident, a preliminary assessment on the involved staff's feelings and emotional reactions should be carefully undertaken. Professional opinions on the staff's mental condition should also be considered before the staff was invited to the investigation.
2. When involved staff was found manifesting unstable mental or emotional responses in the course of investigation, the procedure should be discontinued. It is because traumatic experience often results in memory loss, which impairs an individual to provide accurate information to the investigation. Thus, it is significantly important for the involved staff not to be further traumatized during his recovery.
3. Be neutral and non-judgmental.
4. It is advisable that a staff should be assigned to coordinate all the internal and external investigation activities and to maintain a close contact with the counselors of the Employee Development Service. By doing so, the involved staff will not be overwhelmed by the overflow of information and personnel. When the involved staff is mentally and emotionally fit to participate in each investigation, he will be able to provide the most accurate and useful information to the investigation team.