{"title":"创伤恢复的SHARE模型:在集体主义文化中处理沉默、荣誉、依恋、关系创伤和具身记忆","authors":"Anam Nawaz Malik, Shazia Hassan","doi":"10.1111/jep.70200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Global trauma recovery frameworks have predominantly emerged from Western cultural paradigms, emphasizing individualism, open expression, and cognitive reframing. These approaches often fail to account for the sociocultural realities of collectivist, honor-based societies, where silence, relational boundaries, and communal identity fundamentally shape the trauma experience.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This paper introduces the SHARE Model of Trauma Recovery, a culturally grounded conceptual framework that responds to this gap by centering five core constructs: Silence, Honor, Attachment, Relational Trauma, and Embodied Memory.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Developed through critical synthesis of neurobiological theories (e.g., Polyvagal Theory), feminist psychology, and cross-cultural trauma literature, the SHARE model addresses how cultural scripts, familial loyalty, and suppressed emotion inhibit traditional recovery pathways.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Each element of the model reflects a culturally embedded barrier and potential access point for healing within non-Western contexts, particularly among women and survivors of violence in patriarchal, collectivist societies. The SHARE model redefines trauma recovery as a relational, embodied, and culturally mediated process, extending beyond Western diagnostic categories to include silence as survival, honor as constraint, and attachment as both wounding and healing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Clinical implications, therapeutic applications, and avenues for future empirical testing are discussed. This model offers a critical step toward equitable, culturally responsive trauma care and sets a foundation for transforming global trauma theory and practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The SHARE Model of Trauma Recovery: Addressing Silence, Honor, Attachment, Relational Trauma, and Embodied Memory in Collectivist Cultures\",\"authors\":\"Anam Nawaz Malik, Shazia Hassan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jep.70200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Global trauma recovery frameworks have predominantly emerged from Western cultural paradigms, emphasizing individualism, open expression, and cognitive reframing. These approaches often fail to account for the sociocultural realities of collectivist, honor-based societies, where silence, relational boundaries, and communal identity fundamentally shape the trauma experience.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This paper introduces the SHARE Model of Trauma Recovery, a culturally grounded conceptual framework that responds to this gap by centering five core constructs: Silence, Honor, Attachment, Relational Trauma, and Embodied Memory.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>Developed through critical synthesis of neurobiological theories (e.g., Polyvagal Theory), feminist psychology, and cross-cultural trauma literature, the SHARE model addresses how cultural scripts, familial loyalty, and suppressed emotion inhibit traditional recovery pathways.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Each element of the model reflects a culturally embedded barrier and potential access point for healing within non-Western contexts, particularly among women and survivors of violence in patriarchal, collectivist societies. The SHARE model redefines trauma recovery as a relational, embodied, and culturally mediated process, extending beyond Western diagnostic categories to include silence as survival, honor as constraint, and attachment as both wounding and healing.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Clinical implications, therapeutic applications, and avenues for future empirical testing are discussed. This model offers a critical step toward equitable, culturally responsive trauma care and sets a foundation for transforming global trauma theory and practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"31 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70200\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70200","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The SHARE Model of Trauma Recovery: Addressing Silence, Honor, Attachment, Relational Trauma, and Embodied Memory in Collectivist Cultures
Background
Global trauma recovery frameworks have predominantly emerged from Western cultural paradigms, emphasizing individualism, open expression, and cognitive reframing. These approaches often fail to account for the sociocultural realities of collectivist, honor-based societies, where silence, relational boundaries, and communal identity fundamentally shape the trauma experience.
Objective
This paper introduces the SHARE Model of Trauma Recovery, a culturally grounded conceptual framework that responds to this gap by centering five core constructs: Silence, Honor, Attachment, Relational Trauma, and Embodied Memory.
Method
Developed through critical synthesis of neurobiological theories (e.g., Polyvagal Theory), feminist psychology, and cross-cultural trauma literature, the SHARE model addresses how cultural scripts, familial loyalty, and suppressed emotion inhibit traditional recovery pathways.
Results
Each element of the model reflects a culturally embedded barrier and potential access point for healing within non-Western contexts, particularly among women and survivors of violence in patriarchal, collectivist societies. The SHARE model redefines trauma recovery as a relational, embodied, and culturally mediated process, extending beyond Western diagnostic categories to include silence as survival, honor as constraint, and attachment as both wounding and healing.
Conclusions
Clinical implications, therapeutic applications, and avenues for future empirical testing are discussed. This model offers a critical step toward equitable, culturally responsive trauma care and sets a foundation for transforming global trauma theory and practice.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.