5 Books on Healing From Trauma
'A good book gives you a map to yourself,' said Dr. Maté, now a trauma researcher and author of 'The Myth of Normal.'
While reading Dr. Miller's book, his experiences started to make sense. 'My depression, my self-loathing,' he explained, were a result of early childhood trauma.
Trauma is a deeply distressing experience that leaves lasting effects on a person's thoughts, emotions and behavior. It rewires both the body and mind and shapes overall health. Research shows, however, that the right tools can help us regulate our emotions and rebuild a sense of safety.
Many people are hungry for books that explore trauma: Dr. Bessel van der Kolk's 'The Body Keeps the Score' has sold more than three million copies globally and spent more than six years total on the New York Times best-seller list. But there are other works that can help us make sense of negative experiences.
The five titles below were recommended by neuroscientists, psychologists and trauma specialists as sources to help you understand and process trauma.
'What Happened to You?' by Bruce Perry and Oprah Winfrey
Ms. Winfrey and Dr. Perry blend science and storytelling in this 2021 book, encouraging readers to reframe the question, 'What's wrong with me?' and instead ask, 'What happened to me?'
Caroline Fenkel, chief clinical officer and a founder of Charlie Health, said that after reading the book, her clients 'experience more self-compassion and a sense of agency.'
And, for some people, Ms. Winfrey's star power makes discussing trauma more accessible, said Heath Hightower, an assistant professor of social work at the University of Saint Joseph in West Hartford, Conn. He recommended the book to a trauma survivor who then took steps toward recovery because Ms. Winfrey had been forthcoming about her experience of childhood abuse. Reading the book, he said, helped his client unpack her own abuse and release shame.
'No Bad Parts' by Richard C. Schwartz
Lauren Auer, a trauma therapist in Peoria, Ill., said that this 2021 book is a 'go-to for clients struggling with inner criticism.' In it, Dr. Schwartz introduces internal family systems, a therapeutic model that encourages people to view their minds as having distinct parts or sub-personalities, 'each with its own emotions, voice and protective mechanisms shaped by our life experiences,' said Mollie Candib, a therapist based in New York City.
'When difficult emotions such as anger, shame or guilt arise, our instinct is often to push them away,' Ms. Candib said. Instead, Dr. Schwartz recommends addressing each part individually in order to cultivate deeper self-compassion. His self-inquiry exercise, for example, encourages readers to home in on the specific part of themselves that is feeling a certain way, and to listen without judgment.
One of Ms. Auer's clients began to see her anxiety as 'a well-intentioned protector' after reading this book, she said. 'It was one of those beautiful therapy moments that reminds me why I do this work.'
'Trauma and Recovery' by Judith L. Herman
This book, published in 1992, is 'an underrated and pivotal text for understanding trauma,' said Prentis Hemphill, a therapist and the author of 'What It Takes to Heal.'
Dr. Herman explores the political and social aspects of trauma, said Hemphill, who uses they/them pronouns. 'Survivors of all kinds articulate their experiences,' Hemphill said of the book.
Dr. Herman also presents a framework for recovering from trauma that unfolds in three stages: establishing safety, processing the past and rebuilding connections, said Anita Webster, a counselor based in Houston.
This framework is especially useful for anyone recovering from interpersonal trauma, including abuse and assault, she added, 'because it provides a clear, research-based understanding of how trauma affects survivors psychologically and socially, particularly when harm is inflicted by someone they trusted.'
'Waking the Tiger' by Peter A. Levine with Ann Frederick
In 'Waking the Tiger,' published in 1997, Dr. Levine introduces somatic experiencing, a therapeutic approach that is aimed at helping the body to release trauma by addressing patterns of fight, flight or freeze.
He looks to the animal kingdom to illustrate how trauma affects humans: When an impala escapes a predator, it may start shaking as a way to release and move past the experience. But, Dr. Levine argues, when we become stuck in post-traumatic shock, we suppress that natural response.
His explanation of how the nervous system responds to traumatic experiences 'is huge for helping my clients depersonalize trauma,' said Emma Kobil, a trauma counselor based in Denver. 'When we are on guard or shut down, these reactions aren't irrational,' she said. 'They're biological survival responses.'
'It Didn't Start With You' by Mark Wolynn
This 2016 book 'feels almost mystical in how it connects dots between our present struggles and our family histories,' Ms. Auer explained. Her clients experience immense relief, she said, when they learn that their struggles may be inherited from previous generations.
In the book, Dr. Wolynn offers tools like the core language map, which help readers recognize how certain emotionally charged words can be passed down. In one example from the book, a man noticed how his mother repeated 'We are cursed in love,' which reinforced a narrative of abandonment. Tools like these 'illuminate secret family trauma,' even when the original trauma isn't openly discussed, said Dr. Hightower.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
19 hours ago
- New York Times
What Do You Want to Read About Disability?
I'm Sonia A. Rao, a disability reporter for The New York Times. I started this role in June as a member of The New York Times's 2025-26 fellowship class. My position was created through a partnership with the National Center on Disability and Journalism at Arizona State University to address a lack of coverage of disability issues in media. Previous fellows have written stories about people under guardianship who cannot vote, survivors of gun violence who struggle with physical injuries, including lifelong paralysis, and the evolution of American Sign Language. There is so much I want to write about. I have experience reporting on education and immigration, and am interested in how those topics intersect with disability issues. This is a large and diverse community — approximately one in four Americans have some type of disability — with a vast range of experiences. Recent changes in federal policy are also impacting disabled people's lives. That's why, as I start this position, I want to know what readers, especially people with disabilities, want to see more reporting about. What is our coverage missing? Do you have a story that you want to share? Let us know. Share Your Story
The Intercept
2 days ago
- The Intercept
Bari Weiss's Free Press Wants You to Know Some Kids Being Starved by Israel Were Already Sick
Starving Palestinian children line up for meals at the Nuseirat refugee camp in Deir al-Balah, Gaza, on Aug. 18, 2025. Photo: Moiz Salhi/Anadolu via Getty Images What killed Anne Frank? The Nazis killed Anne Frank. To suggest that any other cause was primary in her vastly premature death is tantamount to vile Holocaust denialism — which is why Holocaust denialists do indeed point out that Frank died of typhus in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. This is precisely the logic that Israel's apologists in the media have deployed in recent days when it comes to the deliberate starvation of the population of Gaza. The right-wing Free Press published a story on Sunday, framed as an investigative exposé, revealing that at least 12 of the Palestinian children featured in viral images depicting the state of Israel-induced famine were not only starving, but … were also sick. The supposed gotcha is that children with disabilities and preexisting health conditions, who cannot get the treatment and nutrition they need because of Israel's genocidal siege, are not representative of the population. And — the horror! — photographs of these non-representative children are prompting global outrage. The idea is we are supposed to be less horrified by the fact that children with disabilities like cerebral palsy and cystic fibrosis are starving to death under the deliberate siege policies of a wealthy, occupying nation-state and its backers. The Free Press, helmed by former New York Times columnist Bari Weiss, is suggesting that in failing to either emphasize or mention the children's health conditions as well as the Israel-induced malnutrition that is killing them, Western media sources using the images are unfairly maligning Israel — despite the fact that it is Israel's genocidal actions that have brought the children to a condition of bare life. It is the very nature of genocide to involve the destruction of conditions necessary for sustaining life, such that sickness as well as direct slaughter destroys, in part or whole, the targeted population. 'This information does not change the fact that the children depicted in this story are suffering from malnutrition due to the difficulties they face accessing aid in Gaza, as reported,' a CNN spokesperson told the Free Press, after the publication informed the network that Hajjaj, a 6-year-old girl featured in a CNN story about starvation in Gaza, was not only starving but also had an 'esophagus condition.' Founded in 2021 by former New York Times writer Bari Weiss, the Free Press pitches itself as home for 'heterodox' thinking, but it has been a reliable platform for the anti-woke, anti-trans, and pro-Israel talking points of mainstream American conservatism. Weiss, who has dedicated her professional life to anti-Palestinian animus and unwavering support for Israel, is reportedly in talks with CBS's new parent company Skydance about buying the online outlet for $250 million. The Free Press is actively stoking genocide denial, but it's not the first media organ to take this odious tack of minimization. In late July, the New York Times cravenly appended a lengthy editor's note and update on a story featuring the image of emaciated 18-month-old Muhammad Zakariya Ayyoub al-Matouq to include the fact that he had other health issues 'affecting his brain and his muscle development.' Even if Israel's siege were only leading to the death of Palestinians with preexisting health issues and disabilities, we would still have on our hands a case of intolerable, eugenic slaughter — as if Palestinian sick children's lives are worth less. Needless to say, Israel's project of genocide and ethnic cleansing takes aim at all Palestinians. The Free Press goes as far as to admit, 'It's not that there isn't hunger in Gaza. There is.' It's a gross understatement. As is well documented and widely recognized, Israel is deliberately starving the population of Gaza. This has been made clear in both intent — as expressed by Israeli government ministers — and effect, as evident in the mounting starvation-based death toll of a reported 266 people from malnutrition-related causes, likely a significant underestimate. Reports from health care workers and international humanitarian groups, the desperate direct pleas of thousands and thousands of Palestinians in Gaza, and the exorbitant prices of barely available basic ingredients all confirm the same. Israeli troops, and perhaps security contractors hired by an Israeli-backed aid group, have killed over 1,400 Palestinians attempting to get food at aid sites since May. Palestinians continue to try to access these death traps daily, simply because there is not enough food elsewhere — all by Israeli design. As the historian Adam Tooze pointed out in a recent newsletter, the purposeful starvation of Gaza by Israel is exceptional. There are 11 places in the world currently where more people are at serious risk of hunger than in Gaza, including Yemen and Sudan, but Tooze pointed out that Gaza is unique: 'Being the result of deliberate policy by a powerful state, commonly regarded as belonging to the exclusive club of 'advanced economies', the mass starvation in Gaza in the summer of 2025 is quite unlike that anywhere else in the world.' Tooze added that, while around half of the populations of Yemen, Sudan, South Sudan, and Haiti are at risk of famine, 100 percent of Palestinians in Gaza are. In Gaza, he writes, the 'risk of famine is total.' Read our complete coverage If a person can, after nearly two years of genocidal onslaught, witness the scenes and testimonies from Gaza — of which the images of these malnourished children are just a tiny slice — and find the main problem is that not enough people know that some of the most vulnerable in Israel's genocide have preexisting health conditions, then we are are not speaking from a framework of shared humanity. I dare say there is nothing such a person could see of Palestinians suffering that would permit them to shift their worldview at this point, because the humanity of Palestinians has been a priori excluded from it. The fact that the Free Press story's authors and publishers do not see that their claim is the modern-day equivalent to suggesting that Frank primarily died of typhus makes all too clear that they do not see Palestinians as fully human. It is a supremacist, eugenicist lens that is beneath contempt, yes, but also beneath debate. A worldview that holds Israel's righteousness firmly at its center resists destabilization — even by images of systematically starved and slaughtered children and babies. After all, Zionist propaganda has for decades had to account for the fact that Israel maims, imprisons, and slaughters children. Images of dead Palestinian children and babies did not only start circulating in this genocidal phase of the ongoing Nakba. A decade ago, the late Charles Krauthammer — a Zionist Washington Post columnist — wrote a column titled 'Moral clarity in Gaza,' praising Israel's actions during its 2014 Gaza assault, which killed over 2,000 Palestinians including over 500 children. Atrocity images circulated then, too, including photos of the mangled, limp frames of four Palestinian kids killed on a Gaza beach by Israeli missiles. Krauthammer described the children as 'telegenically killed' — a line that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself then picked up to blame Hamas for using the 'telegenically dead.' Netanyahu admits that Israel's victims are often telegenic — young children tend to be — but relies on dehumanization of Palestinians so inflexible that even the worst scenes of massacred and starved babies can be consumed without compelling immediate action against Israel as génocidaires. The Free Press's so-called corrections are a ghoulish reminder: It is not a problem of insufficient evidence, it is not a problem of knowledge, that continues to fuel, with support and funds, this genocide.
Medscape
3 days ago
- Medscape
Do Comorbidities Shape MS Outcomes?
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Thanks so much for the opportunity to talk to you today about the effects of comorbidity in people living with multiple sclerosis (MS). My name is Ruth Ann Marrie. I'm a professor of medicine and community health and epidemiology, and the Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Research Chair at Dalhousie University. Today, I'd like to talk to you about what comorbidities often affect people with MS, how often they occur, and the effects of comorbidity on MS-related outcomes. When we talk about comorbidity, we're referring to the total burden of illness other than the specific disease of interest. In our case, MS is the disease of interest, so the comorbidities could include diabetes or hypertension, for example. We exclude from this definition complications that are secondary to MS, like urinary tract infections due to neurogenic bladder. Why? Well, it has importance in terms of thinking about the clinical target. Common Comorbidities in MS: What Can We Learn? Why, more broadly, are we interested in studying comorbidity? Comorbidity may help us to better explain the difference in outcomes between people with MS; we know outcomes are highly heterogeneous. It may help us better prognosticate and make treatment decisions for people with MS. It may also give us insights into the pathogenesis of MS. If we found that diabetes was associated with worse outcomes, we might think about how diabetes affects the brain in terms of its effects on the endothelium, for example, or the role of insulin receptors, and that might then lead to new treatment avenues. What do we know about comorbidity in MS at the present time? We know it's present throughout the disease course, and people with MS actually have a higher burden of some comorbidities even before they present with their first clinical symptoms. We've seen that people with MS have an increased incidence of psychiatric disorders, for instance, five to 10 years before their first clinical presentation. At the time of an MS diagnosis, the most common conditions that we see are depression, hypertension, chronic lung disease (particularly asthma), and anxiety disorders. Depending on the age of the individual with MS at the time of their initial presentation, the prevalence of those conditions may exceed 15%. Overall, we think at least 1 in 4 people with MS have a comorbid condition at diagnosis. If we take a random snapshot of any prevalent MS population, then the most common comorbidities we see are similar to those that we see at diagnosis, with depression and anxiety disorders as well as hypertension being prevalent. Hyperlipidemia and irritable bowel syndrome are also present. An important issue is how the prevalence of those conditions evolves over the course of MS. About 20%-30% of people with MS are going to have depression or an anxiety disorder at any given point in their disease course. In contrast, conditions like hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes are going to increase in prevalence with age. This means people are typically going to have a much higher burden of comorbidity later in their disease course when it's already becoming more difficult to manage their MS, and they may be taking many symptomatic therapies. You might say, well, they're common and we have to worry about polypharmacy between managing the comorbidities and the symptoms of MS, but what's the actual impact on outcomes? Comorbidities and Disease Progression Well, there's been a large amount of work to show that cardiometabolic and psychiatric comorbidities affect multiple outcomes in MS, ranging from delays in the time from symptom onset to diagnosis, the severity of disability at diagnosis, the rapidity of disability progression and lifespan, and quality of life. I'm going to focus on a couple of those for today — specifically, relapses and disability progression. Multiple studies suggest that comorbidity influences relapse rates and the rate of disability worsening. One of the earliest studies was done at the State University of New York at Buffalo by Bianca Weinstock-Guttman and colleagues. It suggested that if you had dyslipidemia, you had faster disability progression and faster accrual of new hyperintense T2 lesions on MRI. Some subsequent studies — for instance, one done by Dr Kyla A. McKay and colleagues — found that among individuals with psychiatric comorbidity, their disability progressed faster. She [and her colleagues linked data from two Canadian clinical and population-based health administrative databases] and, using these datasets, followed over 2000 people for an average of about 10 years. For people who had a mood or anxiety disorder, they accrued nearly 0.3 more Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) point per year than people without psychiatric comorbidity. You might think, well, that's not very much. When you consider that most people with a psychiatric disorder are going to face that long term, you think about that over a 10-year time horizon, that's the difference of about 3 EDSS points. That's the difference between mild and moderate disability, so it's quite substantial. Similar findings have been reported looking at physical comorbidities as well. There was a fairly recent study done by Dr Amber Salter, who is based at UT Southwestern, and colleagues, using meta-analysis of clinical trial datasets. It included 17 trials involving almost 17,000 people with MS. The advantage of this dataset is that people in clinical trials are followed very closely and rigorously, with frequent assessments. She and her colleagues identified comorbidities at the time of enrollment in the clinical trials, and 61% of participants in the trials had some evidence of disease activity, whether it was relapses, disability worsening, or new lesions on MRI. Individuals who had three or more comorbidities had a 14% increased rate of disease activity. Having two or more cardiometabolic comorbidities was associated with a 21% increased rate of any disease activity. When they looked at individual comorbidities, they found that depression and ischemic heart disease seemed to be the biggest driver of those effects. This is really important to think about when you look specifically at relapses. More comorbidities were associated with more relapses. They also found that more comorbidities were associated with faster disability worsening. This really points to the adverse impact of comorbidity on outcomes in MS. This is an example of a longitudinal design, rigorously assessed, so it reduces concerns about the concept of reverse causality — that is, that people with more severe MS may be more likely to accrue comorbidities because they're less physically active, they're not able to eat as well, and so on. The design doesn't fully mitigate that concern. There's another recent study, by Dr Kaarina Kowalec and colleagues, which tried to address this issue by using polygenic scores as an instrumental variable. Polygenic scores are basically weighted averages of all the variants that would be associated with a particular outcome — in this case, depression. The nice thing about using genes is that they are assigned to us at birth. MS couldn't cause those genes to be assigned. If we can show that the polygenic score for depression is associated with relapses and disability progression in the same way that having depression is, then we can remove that concern about reverse causality. In fact, the study findings suggest that's the case. When we put all of these kinds of findings together, they strongly suggest that there is an important role for comorbidities in influencing outcomes and that we really need to intensify our focus on preventing or mitigating those comorbidities as a means of improving outcomes in people with MS. A key question will be, 'What's the best way to do that?' Is it by simply treating these comorbidities the way we normally would, or do we need to treat them more aggressively? Does the type of intervention for those comorbidities matter in terms of achieving that goal of improving outcomes? I think we really need to begin to think about how to integrate these concepts into routine clinical practice. For that, guidelines and tools will be necessary to reach those goals. Thank you so much for your attention today.
