Caveat emptor, caveat venditor, and Critical Incident Stress Debriefing/Management (CISD/M)

Abstract

Mitchell (2004) and Robinson (2004) have expressed concerns regarding our recent article on debriefing (Devilly & Cotton, 2003). In this article we respond to their concerns, some scientific, some sociopolitical, and provide further substantiation regarding our conclusions. We conclude that CISD and CISM are indistinct approaches to trauma and should be treated as synonymous terms (CISD/M) until the necessary and sufficient elements of each are fully declared. Furthermore, based upon current evidence, we restipulate that CISD/M is an ineffective response to critical incidents for individuals, and that organisations need to revise their critical incident response policies to reflect the current weight of scientific evidence. There are currently no reliable studies demonstrating the efficacy of group debriefing.

Notes

We provide further substantiating evidence for our claims at: http://www.swin.edu.au/victims