This article calls trigger warnings into question, as there is evidence they are harmful to trauma survivors.  

Trigger warnings have become so normalized that when a disturbing or even mildly upsetting piece of work doesn’t feature a disclaimer, it is often called out. These brief warnings are sometimes accompanied by a helpful resource and provide audiences with a disclaimer that the content they are about to view might feature retraumatizing material. Many people believe that trigger warnings can dissuade sensitive viewers from retraumatizing themselves through media consumption. However, other evidence suggests that trigger warnings are not beneficial and can even have negative outcomes for trauma survivors.

Life doesn’t provide us with a trigger warning when things are about to get troubling. However, media can do so at the expense of sometimes spoiling content. Many consumers accept that trigger warnings might foretell upcoming episode sexual assaults or suicide attempts so that people have the chance to opt-out of viewing something potentially traumatic. But are trigger warnings beneficial? An article from The New Yorker in September explored the very real possibility that trigger warnings aren’t helping anyone out. Although trigger warnings started appearing in potentially retraumatizing content in the early 2000s, little evidence suggests that they do anything to dissuade post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) responses from people who might be affected by exposure.

Being “triggered” is something that many people claim in recent times, as everyone rushes to avoid triggers. The reality is that it is impossible to predict, respond to, or warn about all content that people find to be triggering. Therefore, a wide scope of content would have to be labeled with a trigger warning to address people’s various stressors- something that isn’t apt to happen. However, it also shouldn’t happen. Using the label “trigger warning” is something that is garnering an increasingly negative connotation. As The New Yorker explored, putting the word “warning” on something immediately alerts audiences to danger and stress. Therefore, labeling something with a “trigger warning” preemptively dictates negativity to audiences.

Trigger warnings have infiltrated more than media, as they are now playing a large role in many schools and university curriculums. The goal of these warnings is to provide individuals the chance to prepare themselves to explore possibly retraumatizing content. However, trigger warnings can elevate distress and increase negative emotions for students. Trigger warnings might accidentally reinforce the blurred lines between trauma and identity, as people who have experienced trauma often have a difficult time separating what happened to them from who they are. Though they are meant to protect vulnerable people, triggers warnings in some cases enforce the belief for these individuals that their trauma is a part of their identity.

Furthermore, people who experience PTSD are encouraged not to avoid their triggers. Exposure to triggers is actually one of the best ways for individuals with PTSD to overcome the disorder. While triggers should be introduced under a safe and controlled setting, exposure therapy is an effective treatment for PTSD. Although people who have experienced trauma often want to avoid reminders of what happened to them, trigger exposure is an unfortunate reality. Therefore, developing skills to face triggers and cope with their consequences can be enormously beneficial for trauma survivors. What isn’t helpful is to have a third-party source brand something as triggering before a survivor has the chance to digest it. In this regard, trigger warnings are once again harming the people they intend to protect.

Overall, determining what might be triggering to people should not be something that media creators or educators should be expected to do. The truth is that there is no way to protect everyone from their individual triggers, and attempting to do so is unwise and unproductive. Trigger warnings are implemented with good intentions (or at least the air of good intentions), but the reality is that they might be causing more harm than good. Therefore, it’s likely best that people gravitate away from trigger warnings and individuals instead focus on developing their own ways to react to and cope with triggering situations.