CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

Michael Grevera Department of Anthropology Bloomsburg University

Children of Terrorism: Examining the Psychological Effects of 9/11 on American Youth

_____________________________________________________________
This paper considers the effects that exposure to the terrorist attacks on 9/11 may have had on the enculturation process and psychological wellbeing of young Americans. Through the use of psychological testing and the examination of personal narratives acquired through interviewing, this research specifically examines the implications of both indirect exposure to the terrorist violence on 9/11 and continued exposure to yearly 9/11 memorials. The sample consisted of 539 participants, 529 of whom completed the psychological instrument The Impact of Event Scale Revised (IES-R), and 10 shared personal narratives that focused on their memories of the attacks when they were children. All of the participants were between the ages of 18-23 during the time of data collection, placing them between the ages 8-13 at the time of the attacks. Final data analysis showed that 91 participants (17.20%) scored 24 or higher on the IES-R suggesting that posttraumatic stress is a clinical concern, and of the 91 participants who scored 24 or above: 56 scored mild (10.59%), 13 scored moderate (2.46%), and 22 scored high (4.16%). Additionally the personal narratives revealed several overlapping themes in the interviews including: vivid recollection of the event, vague explanations from adults as to what had transpired, and critical (and sometimes racist) responses to the attacks from parents. These findings suggest that the terrorist violence carried out on 9/11 had a profound impact on the psychological wellbeing and enculturation process of those exposed, and continued research addressing such effects is essential. Keywords: [Posttraumatic stress reactions, 9/11, terrorism, children] The pain comes from knowing that we have never been safe, and therefore will never be safe again. It comes from knowing we can never be so ignorant again. It comes from knowing we can never be children again. Losing innocence. Remembering heaven. That was the essence of hell. John Jakes

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM The terrorist attacks carried out on September 11th 2001 were the largest anthropogenic tragedy faced by the United States in over half a century. These attacks touched the lives of nearly every American citizen and since have become a permanent fixture in American politics, media, and everyday culture. In total, they claimed over 3,000 lives and left a nation in disbelief and terror. While the most obvious impact to many individuals may have been the physical

damage that occurred on 9/11, what is less apparent and what has received diminishing attention over the years, is the degree to which these events affected the psychological development and the enculturation process of millions of young Americans. In what Fairbrother et al. (2003) refer to as psychological sequels, the American public writ large experienced these devastating attacks repeatedly through various media outlets for weeks after the tragic event. Nearly every television station had around-the-clock news segments involving either Flight 77 claiming the western portion of the Pentagon in Washington D.C., accounts of Flight 93 crashing into a field in Stony Creek Township, Pennsylvania, or, possibly the most visceral, the 110 story twin towers completely collapsing after two Boeing 767s struck the towers only minutes apart. And while media exposure has dramatically decreased over the years, memorials honoring the victims of this tragedy have become a permanent fixture in American culture (Spigel, 2004). When children grow up during a time period personified by war and fear, exposure to violence and the threat of violence becomes embedded in their everyday culture (Korbin, 2003). Over the past decade, it has become commonplace for the media to display the terrorist threat level, flash numbers indicating the ever rising civilian and military body count, or various other graphic and violent depictions of war, almost daily (Spigel, 2004). Children are subsequently exposed to the normal abnormality of violence, and are then forced to develop within its

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM contexts (McIntyre, 2000). Many are unknowingly being enculturated through exposure to psychosocial trauma and as much as any parent may wish to shield their child or children from

this, the level of exposure makes it nearly impossible to do so (Osofsky, 1999). The innocence of many children lies in the aftermath of a national tragedy and after ten years and two wars, it is clear that American culture is forever changed. Literature In order to develop a baseline understanding of the potential psychological effects of adolescent exposure to the terrorist attacks on 9/11, I critically reviewed past and current research based on the examination of such effects, and their cultural implications. The following sections will critically address the subjectivity of psychological testing; discuss the role that direct and indirect exposure to the terrorist attacks on 9/11 had in promoting post-traumatic stress in children; the effects 9/11 had on the enculturation of American youth; and finally, the role parental response has had on youth and subsequently, the expression of trauma after exposure to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Subjectivity of psychological testing One thing that cannot be overlooked is the innate subjectivity of psychological testing, as well as the various ways that post-traumatic stress symptoms can be expressed. Because of this, it is very important to critically view PTSD testing and documentation procedures, especially when reviewing research regarding child populations. Although the traumatic stress elicited due to exposure to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 either directly or indirectly is significant (Otto et al. 2007, Fairbrother et al. 2003) it can be subjective and documented with error (Litz and Keane 1989, Danckwerts and Leathem 2003).

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Direct exposure Fairbrother et al. (2003) conducted a study four months after September 11th in which they assessed the prevalence of post-traumatic stress reactions in children that had resided in New York City at the time of the study. The study utilized a sample that consisted of 434 boys and

girls ages 14-17 and were directly exposed1 to the terrorist attacks. The researchers administered the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index Child revision (PTSDRI-CR) to all participants. The PTSDRI-CR consists of 20 questions with three factors emphasized: re-experiencing/numbing, fear/anxiety, and concentration/sleep. The research concluded that the majority of the sample (62%) displayed moderate levels of Post-Traumatic Stress Responses (PTSR), 21% displayed mild or doubtful levels of PTSR, and 17% of the sample displayed severe or very severe levels of PTSR. The study isolated specific factors such as repeated media exposure, locality (especially in Manhattan), and children viewing highly emotional parental reaction to the crisis were associated with severe levels of PTSR (Fairbrother et al. 2003). Indirect exposure Otto M.W. et al. (2007) conducted a study that examined the impact of indirect exposure2 to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 through media coverage. They assessed 166 boys and girls ages seven to 15 from the Boston area for symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress. The researchers identified post-traumatic stress symptoms using the informants responses to the Child PTSD Symptom Assessment (CPTSDA) that was administered. The parameters that the CPTSDA used to determine levels of PTSD symptoms were based on 17 questions that were itemized around three key factors: re-experiencing, avoidance and arousal. Additionally, they examined the viewing habits in regards to the 9/11 media coverage. They found a correlation between the

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM amounts of media coverage exposure and PTSD symptoms. The results also revealed that the majority of the sample (76%) displayed little to no overt symptoms of PTSD, 19% had symptoms, but not enough for an official diagnosis, and 5% of the sample was comprised of children with symptoms consistent with the diagnosis of PTSD. It is important to note that even

though the minority (5%) of the sample elicited symptoms consistent with a diagnosis for PTSD, that that percentage accounts for 8.3 children out of 166 and in addition to that, 31.5 children out of 166 displayed symptoms of PTSD, though not significant enough for diagnosis (Otto et al. 2007). Parental impact Wilson A.C. et al. (2001) examined the role that parents reactions and parenting styles may have on the level of traumatic stress associated to the terrorist attacks on 9/11. The study utilized a sample of male and female children age nine to 13, and included their parents. The participants were recruited through a larger study they were currently participating in, thus giving the researchers access to data collected post-9/11 including information on maternal depression, maternal parenting (acceptance/rejection and consistent discipline), and information obtained from the Child Behavior Checklist. Children were interviewed within one month of 9/11, and their parents were surveyed to identify different strategies that they employed to help their children understand and cope with this traumatic event. The results revealed pre-9/11 child problems to be a significant predictor of functional impairment3and a negative correlation between high levels of mother-reported helpfulness and low levels of traumatic stress symptoms. Also, an interaction effect was found between pre-9/11 maternal acceptance and child negative emotionality in regard to predicting traumatic stress symptoms. The study concluded that the

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM way parents react to traumatic events has a significant role in the level of traumatic stress their children may experience in response to the event (Wilson et al. 2001). Social Influences In regard to the various post-9/11 cultural changes that emerged within the United States, Anna Richman Berisin (2001) wrote: September 11 created a genre of folk games that have never been recorded before, and, unfortunately, new folk groups: September 11 victims, heroes, frightened travelers, those labeled "terrorists," panicked city dwellers (Berisin 2001:3). Within her article, she explores the role that play and games have in adolescent childrens

methods of coping with traumatic events, specifically with the terrorist attacks on 9/11. She used ethnographic observation techniques to gather data from various children at play and observed how they employed varied expressions of folklore to potentially understand, as well as cope with, their traumatic exposure. They recorded several accounts of play that reflected the terrorist attacks, and occasionally play depicting violence as well. One example noted was the modification of a childrens folk song London Bridge (is falling down) by seven and nine year old male children on a playground in intercity Philadelphia, PA (Berisin 2001). Traditionally the song is sung syntactically as London Bridge is falling down. Falling down, falling down. London Bridge is falling down, my fair lady (Opie and Opie 1997). However the children used World Trade Center as a modifier for London Bridge and sang World Trade Center is falling down. Falling down, falling down. World Trade center is falling down. Oh on top of us. Additionally, she noted a modification of play wherein children would traditionally assume the roles of Cops and Robbers or Superhero and Villain (traditional good guy versus bad guy play). However, she documents a new

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM variation of this with Americans versus Terrorists and traditional play of Superheroes, but the

super villain was now broadly and nontraditionally defined as Terrorist. She also noted a tenyear-old girl pretended to be a soldier which, has rarely been recorded in students' fieldwork. As she herself states collections of children's folklore have always served as a window into the anxieties and ambivalence concerning specific wars and tragedies (Berisin 2001) but, due to the nature and scope of exposure to the terrorist violence of 9/11 and the subsequent reminders of said event, this questions arises: when one looks through this window now, what do they see? The analysis of the above literature allowed us to incorporate research that is currently being conducted, or had been conducted, into our own research. Comprehension of the current research surrounding the cultural and psychological impact that the terrorist attacks on 9/11 is paramount in the process of understanding the future implications of such a tragic and complex event and laid the foundation for our own research. Method The methods utilized for this study consisted of both quasi-experimental and experimental research methodology. This included qualitative and quantitative assessment instruments, utilizing interviews and a questionnaire that included a psychological test. In addition, the library-based component is drawn from the online and campus resources of the Andruss Library of Bloomsburg University. Details noted below: Sample A convenience sample was drawn from the Bloomsburg University student population and included 634 participants. Inclusion criteria consisted of two key elements: participants had to be between the ages 18 and 23 and had been indirectly exposed to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 during their early childhood. Of the 634 participants, 624 participants completed the survey and

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM psychological test, and ten students participated in semi-structured interviews. However, of the 624 participants who completed the survey and psychological test, only 529 met the inclusion criteria. Those who met the inclusion criteria included 339 (64%) women and 190 (36%) men. This consisted of 98 (19%) male students and 155 (29%) female students completing the survey and psychological test approximately seven months prior to the 10th Anniversary of 9/11, and then 184 (35%) female students and 92 (17%) male students within one week after the 10th Anniversary of 9/11. Total sample (N): Completed the questionnaire: Met the inclusion criteria: 634 624 529 339 Female (64%) 190 Men (36%) 10 5 Female (50%) 5 Male (50%) 18 (139) 19 (188) 20 (122) 21 (56) 22 (24) 19.32

Participated in semi-structured interviews:

Age (number of participants):

Age (M):

Quantitative Research Methods The data were collected during two periods: six months prior to the 10th Anniversary memorial of 9/11 and within one week after. This particular method of data collection was employed in order to ascertain a mean level of trauma before, and then after, the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 9/11. This was done so in order to do a comparative analysis between the two time periods. Though the data were collected in two specific time frames, it was also compiled

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM together to develop a baseline for event related traumatic stress experienced collectively by the participants. Questionnaire Surveys were administered that included qualifier questions to determine if the participants exposure to the terrorist attacks was direct or indirect, and if they met the studys age criteria (18-23). In order to determine whether the participants exposure was direct or indirect, participants were asked: Which of the following best describes how you became aware of the 9/11 attacks? a. I saw them live, on television, as they happened (not prerecorded) b. I did not see the events live on television, but I heard about the events as they happened at school c. I did not hear about the events until I came home from school d. I did not learn of the event until at least 24 hours later e. None of the above The structure of this question allowed me to determine whether the exposure to the terrorist violence on 9/11 was indirect or direct. Subsequently, any participants who did not meet the age criteria or had direct exposure to the event were removed prior to data analysis. Instrument The Impact of Event Scale Revised (IES-R) is a self-report inventory. Within the context of this study it was not used as diagnostic tool for PTSD rather, it is designed to measure the subjective response to a specific traumatic event (Christianson and Marren 2008). While the IES-R is one of the most widely used self report measures within trauma literature (J. Gayle Beck et al., 2009), an obvious shortcoming to using the IES-R is that it has a design emphasis

considering ageing populations. However, I strongly weighed the pros and cons of using the IESR and after careful consideration and critical review of the questions, I decided it was the optimal choice. The IES-R allowed me to not only quantify the level of traumatic stress each participant had due to indirect exposure to 9/11, but also allowed me to do a chronological comparison by

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM administering it six months prior to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, and again within one week after. The IES-R consists of 22 closed-ended questions designed to obtain an overall subjective score. The IES-R also determines an intrusion mean (8 items), avoidance mean (6

10

items), and hyperarousal mean (8 items). Item Response Anchors are: A = Not at all; B = A little bit; C = Moderately; D = Quite a bit; E = Extremely. Therefore, the IES-R has a scoring range of 0 to 32 for intrusion, 0 to 20 for hyperarousal, 0 to 32 for avoidance and 0 to 88 for an overall score. For individuals who scored 24-32 PTSD is a clinical concern (Neal et al., 1994); participants who scored 33 36 meet the cutoff score for a probable diagnosis of PTSD (Creamer & Falilla, 2002); and participants who scored 37 or more may be expiring traumatic stress that is high enough to suppress their immune system (Kawamura, Yoshiharu, & Nozomu, 2001). Qualitative Research Methods Much of the data was obtained through quantitative methods. However, I also felt it necessary to collect qualitative data in order to gain individual perspective on key topics including, but not limited to: adult reactions (relatives and teachers), level of understanding during and after the attacks, memory, and the general impact on culture. Ten respondents participated in semistructures interviewing. Each interview was approximately 30-45 minutes in duration and consisted of 12 open-ended questions minimally. The interviews were designed to probe for personal narratives surrounding the events September 11, 2001. Each interview was transcribed with the permission of the participants in order to ensure accuracy during data collection. Quantitative Results The first step in our analysis of the data from the questionnaire was reviewing the level of indirect exposure to the terrorist attacks through various media outlets. Within the questionnaire

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

11

participants were asked: During the first week after 9/11, how many times would you estimate you saw the towers collapse and/or the planes strike the towers on television? The frequencies of responses are provided in Figure 1. The majority of the participants (49.53%) reported witnessing the attacks, on television, 15 or more times within the first week of media coverage. This question allowed us to gauge the level of indirect media exposure to the event that each participant had.
300 262 Amount reported seeing the aatacks 250 200 150 100 51 50 0 0 to 5 6 to 10 Available responses 11 to 15 15+

119 97

Figure 1. Responses to the question: During the first week after 9/11, how many times would you estimate you saw the towers collapse and/or the planes strike the towers on television? Descriptive Statistics Table 1 displays the mean (M) levels of Intrusion (5.23/32), Hyperarousal (2.20/32), and Avoidance (5.54/20) found within the sample population (N=529). Additionally, it displays the total score of all participants who completed the IER-S (M = 12.99). These results show that although trauma is present in the sample population (based on the total subjective score of the

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM IES-R), the collective score is not high enough to suggest posttraumatic stress within the entire sample population. Table 1. Mean values of the IES-R for the entire sample Total Sample Intrusion Hyperarousal Avoidance Total Score N=529 M= 5.23 M= 2.20 M= 5.54 M= 12.99

12

However, 91 (17.2%) participants scored 24 or higher indicating the possibility of event related traumatic stress due to exposure to the terrorist attacks on 9/11. The results on Table 2 below display the mean scores of participants who scored 24 or higher on the IES-R. Of the 91 participants who score 24 or above, 56 scored mild, 13 scored moderate, and 22 scored high for possible levels of event related traumatic stress. A score ranging from 24 32 suggests scoring that is high enough to make PTSD a clinical concern (Asukai et al. 2002); 33 37 suggests a score high enough to denote a probably diagnosis of PTSD (Creamer et al. 2002); and 37 or more indicates levels that are potentially high enough to suppress ones immune systems functioning (Creamer et al. 2002). Table 2. Mean values of the IES-R for the participants who scored 24 or greater Total, Scored 24+ Intrusion: Hyperarousal: Avoidance: Total Score Memorial Analysis A between-group design was employed and multiple independent group t-tests were used to determine any statistical difference between scores before and after the memorial. IES-R scores for the pre-memorial group (M = 12.73) and the post-memorial group (M = 13.14) were assessed n = 91 (17.2%) M = 12.79 M = 7.21 M = 12.02 M = 32.02 High (37 or more): Moderate (33 37): Mild (24 32): n 22 of 91 13 of 91 56 of 91 % 24 14 62

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

13

and no statistically significant difference was found (t(487.468) = .42, p = .420). Table 4 displays the mean scores for intrusion, hyperarousal, avoidance, and total score, which demonstrate little to no difference between the groups. This indicates that the anniversary of the event does not place additional stress on the population, nor does it appear to have a positive impact. Table 3. Mean values of the IES-R with pre and post memorial comparison. Pre-memorial n = 253 M= 4.93 Intrusion: M= 2.45 Hyperarousal: M= 5.39 Avoidance: Total Score: M= 12.74 Post-memorial n = 276 M= 5.523 Intrusion: M= 1.95 Hyperarousal: M= 5.70 Avoidance: Total Score: M= 13.14

However, an analysis of those who had an IES-R scores indicating trauma (24 or above) against those who scored below the cutoff revealed a significant difference (t(121.529) = 28.649, p < .000). A further in-depth analysis of differences between the scores indicating trauma and those of a normal level was conducted based on gender, and a significant difference was revealed for the scores of men (t(43.316) = 16.774, p < .000), as well as women (t(76.811) = 23.175, p < .000). These results are consistent with our expectations of finding that the event had a strong psychological effect in children. Table 4 displays mean IES-R scores for those who scored 24 and above. These scores also indicate no significant difference between the pre-memorial group and the post-memorial group. Table 4. Mean values of the IES-R for participants who scored 24 or greater with pre and post memorial comparison Scored 24+ Cluster Intrusion: Hyperarousal: Avoidance: Total Score Pre-memorial n = 48 M= 12.91 M= 7.73 M= 12.58 M= 33.21 Score 24+ Cluster Intrusion: Hyperarousal: Avoidance: Total Score Post-memorial n = 43 M= 12.65 M= 6.63 M= 11.40 M= 30.70

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Gender Additionally, the data was reviewed after isolating gender. Table 5 below displays the mean scores for men and women in the pre-memorial and post- memorial groups. The results show

14

little to no variation existing between the scores (each score differs no more than a point) of each IES-R dimension in the groups. Independent t-tests on the data considering gender revealed that there is no significant difference in trauma levels between men (M = 12.89) and women (M = 12.98) (t(384.841) = .093, p = .926). Table 5. Mean values of the IES-R for participants who scored 24 or greater with pre and post memorial, and gender comparison. Cluster Intrusion: Hyperarousal: Avoidance: Total Score F Pre n =155 M= 5.12 M= 2.55 M= 5.32 M= 12.88 M Pre n = 98 M= 4.62 M= 2.36 M= 5.50 M= 12.52 F Post n=184 M= 5.62 M= 1.65 M= 5.96 M= 13.12 M Post n =92 M= 5.12 M= 2.55 M= 5.32 M= 12.88

Qualitative Results The following section contains responses to the questions asked during the semi-structured interviewing process. Each participant was asked the following 12 questions, designed to probe for personal narratives. Prior to beginning each interview, the participants were read an informed consent statement and their age and gender was noted. While this section does contain every question, for the sake of brevity it does not contain every response. The responses shown below serve as an example of the types of responses these questions elicited. To ensure anonymity, each participant was labeled as Participant with sequential alphabetical characters starting with A and ending with J (e.g. Participant C). Questions one through three focused on the specific memories that the participants had in regard to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Question one asked: Do you remember discussing the events of 9/11 after they happened with teachers? This question was asked in order to gauge

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM the reactions of trusted adults and note the type of explanations that each participant had received. An 18-year-old female participant reported:

15

Yes, when it happened the teacher left the room so she and the principal could discuss it and she returned crying and informed the class of the tragedy. She was welling up during the talk, and she did not really understand what was going on or the gravity (Participant A). The participants were also asked if they discussed the events of 9/11 with both family and friends (serving as two additional questions asked separately) after responding to the first portion of the question. Therefore the first question was always followed with some variation of Do you remember discussing the events of 9/11 after they happened with parents/friends? These additional modifications of the original question served the same purpose, noting the type of explanations the participants received and the type of conversational interaction that occured between their family and friends. When asked if he remembered discussing the events with his parents, a 21-year old male participant reported: My father told me I was too fucking young to understand. They (his parents) also spoke negatively about the Arabs such as calling them sand niggers (Participant E). When asked if he discussed the events with his friends the participant reported: We talked about it in school wondering why we were getting out early. We werent really allowed to know anything was going on (Participant E). The second question asked was Do you remember what people said in regard to the events of 9/11 and how they explained it to you? This question served a similar purpose as question one in that it probed for explanations given to the participants when they were children. However, this question was much more direct than question one, which allowed for more specific responses. A 20-year old female participant reported: Seeing the actual World Trade Center building burn. I was watching the newscast live and remember watching the second plane hit the building. I looked at my teacher and his eyes were watery and had a sad look on his face, the classroom was shocked. (Participant F).

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM The third question asked was What do you remember most from the television reports at the time? This question was asked in order to determine what, if anything, stood out to each

16

participant while watching various media sources and the level of detail in regard. A 19-year old female participant reported: I remember them showing the plane flying into the second tower over and over again, and all of the debris that was scattered specifically a family picture on the ground that they would focus in on (Participant C). Questions four through six focused on the feelings that the participants had in regard to the attacks as well as subsequent memorials. Question four asked: How anxious do you feel around September 11 each year? This question was asked to obtain a more qualitative response to understand the anxiety that each participant may have felt in relationship to the memory of the attacks. A 20-year old female participant reported: I get sad. I think about the people who lost their lives that day and the babies that will never meet their fathers (Informant F). The fifth question asked was How much do you think about the actual event each September 11(memorial)? This question is similar to question four however, rather than addressing associated anxiety, it was employed to gauge personal feelings about the event each year. A 22year old male participant reported: Every once in a while it will pop into my head, if I see something on TV or even a video game depicting a terrorist attack. Anything that depicts a terrorist attack really triggers it. I get mad about it, theres no reason it had to happen, it was a pointless act of terrorism. They didnt gain much from it other than some dead bodies and damaged buildings. At the end of the day we cant replace those lives lost, but we can still rebuild. It was just about fear (Participant J). The sixth question asked was Do you feel the memorials are beneficial and/or serve as a yearly reminder of the tragic even? This question was used to directly ask the participant their feeling about the yearly memorials. The participants almost universally had mixed feelings about the yearly memorial reporting various responses:

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Memorials are beneficial for people who lost loved ones, but for most who are more indirectly involved with it, it may just serve as a reminder rehashing up old feeling (Participant C, 19 year old female). Its just my opinion but it makes you think of it, so its going to help you remember what happened just like that saying always remember, never forget (Participant D, 20 year old female). The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Its a good idea and we shouldnt forget it. However the memorials and tragedies are manipulated to serve a purpose or (for people to) serve themselves (Participant A, 18 year old female).

17

Questions seven and eight served a dual purpose. They were primarily used to gauge the level of detailed recognition each participant had in association with the event. However, they also provided a personal context for each participant and their feelings in regard. The seventh question asked during the interviews was Do you remember anything that confused you when you were a child about 9/11 events? This question was used to try to obtain a greater understanding of the concerns the participants had with the explanations (or lack thereof) they received as children. A 19-year old female participant reported: No one told me what was going on but I knew something was up. Their behavior was very confusing. I didnt understand why no one would tell me what was going on, and even when I found out, I didnt understand the whole situation anyway (Participant C). Question 8 contained two parts. First each participant was asked: Do you remember how you felt as a child when 9/11 occurred? A 20-year old female participant reported: I was confused about why they were blown up and what they were and it made me sad. When I see people cry it makes me teary eyed because Im sad that they are sad. It was so sad to see all those people running through the sheets covered in all the stuff like dust. Its so sad to know that all those people died (Participant D). The second portion of the question asked: What were you doing prior to the event? The same 20-year old female participant reported: I was sitting in class talking about math and my teacher got a phone call, and me and my math group [sic] were talking. My best friend at the time was like oh my god your birthday is in eight days and asked what I wanted. I said I didnt know I really wanted a bunny, and my

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

18

friend asked what I would name it and we talked about names. My teacher came in crying then and we all looked up and she got tissues and ran down the hallway leaving us by ourselves. When she came back she said sorry that there was personal stuff going on and then an announcement came on saying we couldnt have recess because they were mulching the play ground and we didnt think that was true and argued about it, and the teacher continued to tell us that was true. We found out about it right before lunch (what happened). We were allowed to watch it on TV and they explained it briefly to us and told us we had to have our parents explain it more to us. I remember telling my grandmother that if they did bomb our country again that they would wait until after my birthday (Participant D). Questions nine through eleven attempted to gauge the level of continued exposure through various outlets and isolated sources that could affects ones enculturation. Question nine asked: How many TV shows or movies have you seen about 9/11? and How did you respond to them? A 19-year old female participant reported: Probably four. One was a documentary on a news station, and Remember Me. I dont remember the other ones really but I know I saw them. I cried my eyes out during Remember Me at the end, just because it shows how people lost their loved ones that way. When they show documentaries it gives me the chills sometimes to know that people could want to ride a plane into a building and could be rude, selfish, ignorant bastards. Those Arabs can go to hell, lets take a bomb and blow up North and South Korea, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan. (Participant H) Question ten asked: Are there any ways that your daily behavior or beliefs have been affected by 9/11 (Scared to fly, on edge when you see individuals who resemble Arabic peoples, more watchful when in airports etc.)? This question was used to probe for specific example of how the participants behaviors and beliefs have changed (if they have) since the terrorist attacks on 9/11. A 22-year old male participant reported: As bad as it sounds, when I was younger I would look twice at people who looked Arabic, and just wonder if they could be terrorists. I wouldnt accuse anyone but it made me wonder. I think everyone at that point was scared and had similar thoughts, with being scared comes curiosity. Now everyone just jokes around about it, I guess as a way to cope with it. We joke and say oh hey that guys a terrorist but we dont really mean it. I dont have any biases; I work with plenty of people of Arabic decent (Participant G).

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Question eleven asked the participants: Do you have a parent or sibling or have you served in the military since 9/11? This question was designed to determine whether the participants had close family ties to military personal that may have served overseas in support of the Global War on Terror. A 20-year old female participant reported: I have two cousins who have served. One is a Marine and the other is in the Army. My cousin who is a Marine has deployed twice to Iraq and Afghanistan, and the other one (Army) went to Pakistan and Afghanistan (Participant F). The interviews were all concluded with one final question (question 12) that asked: Is there anything additional you would like to share about the events of 9/11? Not every participant chose to disclose more information. However, two participants did share additional information. One, a 20-year old female participant, was quite worked up by the end of the interview and stated:

19

No, I already gave you my opinion on what you should do to those Arabic places. It has to be a nuclear bomb because all they do is cause problems. They cant keep to themselves. If they dont like our independent country then they can stay in their own damn country. They are sick if they want to raise their kids to go kill themselves. I can see wanting to die for your country but thats weird to just raise your kid to fly a plane into a building (Participant D). The other participant who, a 22-year old male, concluded with: Not at this time, but it should be brought up continuously, just like the Pearl Harbor attack, theres no difference between them they should both be remembered. And the government is a large conspiracy and full of propaganda, and the economy is going to fall within the year (Participant B). After the interview was completed, I thanked all of the participants and provided them with my contact information and instructed them to contact me if they had anything further the wanted to share or if they had any questions.

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Discussion Quantitative Discussion The IES-R produced strong results suggesting that indirect exposure to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 had a profound impact of their psychological wellbeing as well. The results suggest that

20

posttraumatic stress is a clinical concern in a significant portion of the total sample (Neal et al., 1994). However, the results of the IES-R also indicate that the yearly memorials honoring the victims of 9/11 are not likely exacerbating the levels of traumatic stress due to the nearly identical scores pre and post memorial. Interestingly, the results of IES-R also had shown no significant gender differences. There is a substantial amount of documented research considering gender differences and trauma, and much of the psychological literature indicates that women are nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (Najavits, Weiss, and Shaw 1997; Brady and Randall 1993; Creamer et al. 2001). It also reports that though men more likely to experience assaultive violence, women are more likely than men to develop PTSD as a result (Breslau and Anthony 2007) and a National Comorbidity Survey (N = 9,282) conducted in 2005 showed that both the lifetime prevalence rate (lpr) and the year prevalence rate (ypr) of PTSD are greater in women (9.7% lpr; 5.2% ypr) compared to men (3.6% lpr; 1.8% ypr) (National Comorbidity Survey 2004). Because our results did not reflect gender differences in the expression of traumatic stress, my initial thought explaining this was that the participants ages during the traumatic event might have neutralized gender. While no population-based epidemiological study has isolated the prevalence of traumatic stress in children (Gabbay et al. 2004), Kilpatrick et al. (2003) examined data from the National Survey of Adolescents (N= 4,023) which concluded that the six month prevalence was estimated at 3.7% for males and 6.3% for females

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

21

age 12 through 17 (Kilpatrick et al. 2003). Because of this, it remains unclear why my results do not show a gender disparity. Qualitative Discussion During the interviews the informants (ages 8 to 12 years old at the time of the attacks), were able to give extremely detailed accounts of their experiences before, during, and after the terrorist attacks. This fact aids in illustrating the degree to which 9/11 impacted them and, in many ways, has been carried with them into the present. Nevertheless, the initial level of understanding the informants had in regard to the event was minimal, and the explanations given to them by people of authority were usually vague or in some cases unproductive and racist. The lack of explanation (or the presence of improper and harmful explanations), left many of the informants confused, and in several cases they found themselves without an outlet to express their feelings. Consequently, during the interviews, informants responded to some of the questions with a wide range of emotional responses. Some used anger to express their feelings, while others chose empathy and regret. However, one response was universal: each informant had strong emotional ties to that tragic day. Conclusion In the final analysis, the results show that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 had a strong effect on both the enculturation process and mental health of young American adults. It is not clear what the longitudinal effects of this traumatic exposure will be. However, I believe that it has shaped the values, beliefs, and psychology of an entire generation of young American adults, and is likely impact their decision-making and attitudes for the remainder of their lives. Because of this, further research on the longitudinal effects is absolutely essential.

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM Acknowledgments First and foremost I wish to express our sincerest gratitude to all of the students at Bloomsburg

22

University who participated. Additionally, I would like to thank Katelyn McMichael for assisting me with data collection and data entry, and Faith Warner, PhD, for helping me during the initial stages of this project.

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

23

End Notes 1. Direct exposure was on the basis of informants living or going to school in close proximity to the World Trade Center and/or witnessing the terrorist attacks first hand (Fairbrother et al. 2003). 2. Indirect exposure was on the basis of informants not living or going to school in close proximity to the World Trade Center and/or did not witness the terrorist attacks first hand (Otto et al. 2007). 3. Functional impairment refers to limitations due to the illness, as people with a disease may not carry out certain functions in their daily lives (stn and Kennedy 2009).

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

24

Bibliography American Psychiatric Association 2000 Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (Revised 4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Asukai, N. et al. 2002) Reliability and validity of the Japanese-language version of the Impact of event scale-revised (IES-R-J). Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 190 (3): 175-182. Beresin, Anna Richman 2002 Children's Expressive Culture in Light of September 11, 2001. Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 33(3):331-337 Bokszczanin, Anna 2007 PTSD Symptoms in Children and Adolescents 28 Months After a Flood: Age and Gender Differences. Journal of Traumatic Stress 20 (3): 347351 Brady, Kathleen and Carrie L. Randall 1993 Gender Differences in Substance Use Disorders. Psychiatric Clinics of North America. 22 (2): 241-252 Breslau, Naomi and James C. Anthony 2007 Gender Differences in the Sensitivity to Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: An Epidemiological Study of Urban Young Adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 116 (3): 607 611 Briere, J. 1977 Psychological assessment of adult posttraumatic states. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)/Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Emergency Preparedness and Response. Coping with a traumatic event: Information for health professionals. Creamer, M. et al. 2001 Post-traumatic stress disorder: findings from the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-being. Psychological Medicine, 31: 1237-1247 2002 Psychometric properties of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 41:1489-1496. 2002 Psychometric properties of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 41: 1489-1496. Danckwerts, A. and J. Leathem 2003 Questioning the Link Between PTSD and Cognitive Dysfunction. Neuropsychology Review 13(4)

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

25

Fairbrother, Gerry, et al. 2003 Posttraumatic Stress Reactions in New York City: Children After the September 11, 2001, Terrorist Attacks. Ambulatory Pediatrics. 3 (6): 304-311 Flynn, Karen, et al. 2002 Teaching the Day After: An Assessment of American University Pedagogy in the Wake of September 11, 2001. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 33(3): 350-367. Gabbay, V. et al. 2004 Epidemiological aspects of PTSD in children and adolescents. In Raul R. Silva (Ed.), Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Handbook. New York: Norton: 1- 17 Gavranidou, Maria and Rita Rosner 2003 The Weaker Sex? Gender and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. Depression and Anxiety 7(3):130-139. Henry, Jeanne 2002 What Madness Prompts, Reason Writes: New York City September 11-October 2, 2001. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 33(3): 283-296. Horowitz, M.J. et al. 1979 Impact of Events Scale: A measure of subjective stress. Psychosomatic Medicine. 41(3): 209-218. Kawamura, N. et al. 2001 Suppression of Cellular Immunity in Men with a Past History of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry. 158: 484-486 Kidron, Carol A. 2004 Surviving a Distant Past: A Case study of the Cultural Construction of Trauma Descendant Identity. Ethos. 31(4): 513-544. Koplewicz, Harold S., et al. 2004 The 9/11 experience: who's listening to the children? Psychiatric Clinics of North America. 27: 491-504. Litz, B. and T. Keane 1989 Information processing in anxiety disorders: application to the understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder. Clinical Psychology Review. 9: 243-257. Mattingly, Cheryl et al. 2002 Narrating September 11: Race, Gender, and the Play of Cultural Identities. American Anthropology. 104(3):743-753

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

26

McCarty, Teresa L. 2002 Against Forgetting: Anthropology and Education in the Aftermath of September 11, 2001. Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 33(3): 275-279. McIntyre, A. 2000 Constructing Meaning About Violence, School, and Community: Participatory Action Research with Urban Youth. Urban Review. 32: 123-154 Najavits, L. M. et al. 1997 The Link Between Substance Abuse and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Women. The American Journal on Addictions. 6: 273283. Neal, L.A., et al. 1994 Convergent Validity of Measures of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in a Mixed Military and Civilian Population. Journal of Traumatic Stress. 7 (3): 447-455. Olff, Miranda, Willies Langeland, Nel Draijer, and Berthold P.R. Gersons 2007 Gender Differences in Posttaumatic Stress Disorder. Psychological Bulletin. 133(2): 183-204. Opie, I., Opie P. 1997 The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2:270-6. Osofsky, Joy D. 1999 The Impact of Violence on Children. The Future of Children Domestic Violence and Children 9(3): 33-49. Otto, M. W., et al. 2007 Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms following media exposure to tragic events: impact of 9/11 on children at risk for anxiety disorders. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 21(7): 888-902. Smith, Nathaniel W. 2002 In the Belly of the Beast. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 33(3):338-349. Spigel, L. 2004 Entertainment Wars: Television Culture after 9/11. American Quarterly. 56(2): 225-270 Sundin, E.C., and M.J. Horowitz (2002) Impact of event scale: Psychometric properties. British Journal of Psychiatry, 180, 205-209. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Retrieved March 3, 2008, from http://www.ncptsd.org.

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

27

Weiss, D.S. and C.R. Marmar 1997 The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. In J.P. Wilson, & T.M. Keane (Eds.), Assessing Psychological Trauma and PTSD: A Practitioners Handbook. Guilford Press. 399-411 Weiss, D.S. 2004 The Impact of Event Scale-Revised. In J.P. Wilson, & T.M. Keane (Eds.), Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD: A practitioners handbook. New York: Guilford Press. (2): 168-189 2007 The Impact of Event Scale: Revised. In J.P. Wilson, & C.S. Tang (Eds.), Crosscultural assessment of psychological trauma and PTSD. New York: Springer: 219-238

CHILDREN OF TERRORISM

28