Understanding the Role of Avoidance in Trauma Coping
By Dina Borisova
Trauma is experienced when an event exceeds an individual's capacity to manage or cope (Herman, 1997) and is understood as being shaped by an individual’s response, rather than the traumatic event itself (SAMHSA, 2014). This reflects the inherently individualized nature of trauma—two individuals experiencing the same event may present with entirely different responses, with one experiencing lasting psychological impact, while the other may be less affected. These differences are influenced by a variety of factors, including the ways individuals cope with and adapt to distressing experiences, as variations in coping styles may contribute to both positive and negative sequelae of trauma (Peters et al., 2021).
As noted by Korem et al. (2023), one of the most identified patterns in trauma literature is avoidance coping mechanisms—patterns involving both cognitions and behaviors aimed to avoid dealing with stressful experiences. It is important to note that avoidance coping mechanisms are not inherently maladaptive in their origin. Many individuals may rely on these mechanisms in an effort to create adaptive change, recognizing that past traumatic experiences cannot be erased or changed, but can be managed in ways that support movement toward new beginnings. At the same time, research indicates that these strategies may have long-term maladaptive effects, as they can interfere with the adaptive integration of traumatic events into consolidated memories, despite reducing stress in short-term contexts (Korem et al., 2023). Ehlers and Clark (2000) also emphasize that problematic behavioral and cognitive strategies, such as avoidance, may prevent individuals from modifying negative appraisals of the trauma, thereby maintaining post-traumatic stress responses over time.
What do Trauma-Induced Avoidance Patterns Look Like?
Avoidance patterns aimed at reducing trauma-related distress or symptoms may actually appear adaptive, both to the individual and within broader societal or interpersonal contexts. They often take the form of everyday behaviors that seem normal (and even healthy) particularly in environments that prioritize productivity and external functioning.
These patterns may include:
Minimization of one’s experiences, allowing the individual to appear stable and functional in interpersonal contexts
Distancing from emotions, symptoms, or from the traumatic event itself
Prioritizing external functioning over internal, emotional experiences
Maintaining high levels of productivity in work and responsibilities, sometimes at the expense of other adaptive behaviors, such as socialization or meaningful interpersonal connection
Avoidance patterns can be more generically understood as experiential avoidance, a concept outlined by Hayes et al. (1996). While terms such as emotional or cognitive avoidance are often used, Hayes and colleagues argued that avoidance patterns reflect a larger process in which individuals attempt to escape, avoid, or modify their lived experiences, rather than only the emotions or thoughts themselves that may have generated from these experiences.
How Can Healing Begin?
Many individuals are able to recognize, or develop meaningful insight into their trauma-induced avoidance behaviors, yet still find it difficult to create change. Healing does not need to be understood as the removal of these responses, even if they were once adaptive and later became maladaptive. Rather, the aim of healing can be understood as developing awareness of how these responses are operating, and whether they support functional ways of living over time. Similarly, trauma-informed care does not need to center on immediate confrontation or acknowledgment of distressing experiences. Phase-oriented approaches to trauma treatment suggest that stabilization is often necessary—and even preferred—before engaging in deeper processing. Early stages emphasize patient safety, symptom stabilization, and the development of basic life competencies, with exploration of traumatic memories introduced later to support meaning-making and integration (Courtois & Ford, 2009; Judith Herman, 1997). Over time, this process allows individuals to move toward a way of living that extends beyond managing distress, instead fostering a greater sense of presence and sustainability in daily life.
References
Courtois, C. A., & Ford, J. D. (2009). Treating complex traumatic stress disorders: An evidence-based guide. Guilford Press.
Ehlers, A., & Clark, D. M. (2000). A cognitive model of PTSD. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38(4), 319–345.
Hayes, S. C., Wilson, K. G., Gifford, E. V., Follette, V. M., & Strosahl, K. (1996). Experiential Avoidance and Behavioral Disorders: A Functional Dimensional Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64(6), 1152–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.64.6.1152
Herman, J. L. (1997). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror (Rev. ed.). Basic Books.
Korem, N., et al. (2023). Correlates of avoidance coping in trauma-exposed U.S. military veterans. Journal of Affective Disorders, 339, 89–97.
Peters, J. R., et al. (2021). Individual differences in coping styles and trauma outcomes. European Psychiatry.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2014). SAMHSA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma-informed approach (HHS Publication No. SMA 14-4884).
