MORE than 500 people have come forward claiming sexual and physical abuse at the hands of staff at the former Medomsley Detention Centre. Gavin Engelbrecht speaks to psychotherapist Zoe Lodrick who has made a video to help victims come to terms with the long-term effects of the abuse.
HUNDREDS of young inmates of Medomsley Detention Centre who lived under a reign of terror have been left with a legacy and shame and guilt after suffering appalling abuse at the hands of staff.
Decades later, many may wonder why they did not struggle, scratch or scream and in some cases developed positive feelings towards their abusers.
Even less likelywould they have heard of the Stockholm Syndrome - something more commonly associated with hostage and kidnapping situations.
But the psychological phenomenon , also known as trauma bonding, may go some way to explaining the reactions of victims of historic abuse.
The phrase was first coined at the end of a six-day bank siege in the Swedish capital in 1973, to describe irrational feelings of sympathy captors develop for their captives. During the standoff the captives rejected help and defended their captors after they were freed.
Psychotherapist and sexual trauma expert Zoe Lodrick, who has made video for Durham Police, to help victims of sexual and physical abuse come to terms with what happened to them, says: “What many of victims of Medomsley would have experience would have been serious trauma on a grand scale by a group of organised criminals, who were legitimised by their role in that organisation and who targeted very vulnerable people .
“It created trauma bonding, which happens when someone is exposed to situation where they are faced with an interpersonal threat.
“The first element is someone is threatening to hurt them and they believe that person will carry out that threat.
“The second is that they are treated harshly, but that treatment is interspersed with small kindnesses. And they are isolated from others and unable to escape.”
She adds: “The symptoms are a positive feeling towards their abuser, which some of the victims may well have experienced, despite the fact that it makes no logical sense .
“At the time they also have negative feelings toward potential rescuers - anyone who might have been able to get them out of that situation.
“Stockholm Syndrome develops after four days and some of this activity (at Medomsley) went on for four months and more.
“So people end up bonded and silenced by the Stockholm Syndrome, which many of the survivors don’t understand.
“They look back and think they were treated so horrendously and yet they may have had positive feelings towards the people who were mistreating them.”
Ms Lodrick adds many victims are also wracked with shame and guilt for not fighting back and cannot forgive themselves.
She says: “Logically it would make sense to fight, run, scream or tell someone, but the victims of sexual abuse hardly ever do that.
“Any sexual offence examiner will tell you the vast majority of victims of sexual crime have little or no injuries - defence injuries at least.
“But it doesn’t change what people think. People’s perception is usually they would fight, struggle, scratch or scream.
“And when they don’t it is very puzzling and difficult (for victims) to come to terms with.”
Ms Lodrick says it is all to the survival reaction governed by the amygdala part of the brain, which deals with threats.
She says: “The amygdala is like a smoke detector in the brain and its job is to filter and scan all the sensory input into the brain.
“If it detects threat, its job is to release chemicals into our body to prepare us to meet the threat.
“The amygdala will only prioritise survival. All it cares about is this second now.
“It couldn’t care about whether you feel ashamed in the future or whether you’ll have post traumatic stress disorder.
“It’s only job in that moment is to concern itself with survival.
The common reactions to threat are fight, flight, friend, freeze and flop, according to Ms Lodrick.
She says: “If someone is threatening me I might go to a friend defence, whereby I smile in order to minimise the likelihood of being seriously hurt. Or I might start to talk to them to try and appease them. That is the first defence response.
“To freeze is supposed to indicate submission to get the other person to back off.
“When it fails the victim will flop or become physically malleable and yield to any physical or sexual impact.
“It is great news in terms of survival, because you are less likely end up badly injured and less likely to end up dead.
“The rational areas of the brain are often overwhelmed by chemicals and often they are bypassed.
“If the person does survive and survives well with relatively little or no injuries comparative to what might have happened if they had tried to fight, the amygdala will reinforce that as having been successful.
“Therefore if they find themselves in a similar situation they will instigate the same reaction.
“Rationally people have no understanding of that and cannot explain it if people ask “why didn’t you fight?”
The guilt and shame that follow are psychologically healthy in that they give people hope.
She adds: “The reality is that no victim of sexual or physical crime is responsible for what happened to them.
“It doesn’t change the fact that people often feel guilty and ashamed.
“Durham Police have been excellent in signposting victims to the appropriate services.”
Anyone with information should contact the police on 101 or visit a dedicated page set up on www.durham.police.uk.
Alternatively anyone not wishing to speak to the police can call The Meadows on 0191-3018554, or the NSPCC on 0808 800 5000.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here