The Best Story Doesn’t Always Win: How Social Media and Trauma-Informed Spaces Turn Survival Into Competitive Currency

By Dr. Dawn Lindsey

Executive summary

Social media and trauma-informed spaces are meant to uplift resilience. Yet they often do the opposite. On one side, those who go public with their trauma do so with courage and advocacy in mind—sharing painful truths to raise awareness, prevent harm, and help others feel less alone. But instead of being embraced, many survivors are dismissed, accused of “seeking attention,” or ignored altogether. On the other side, those of us with deeper, layered trauma face a double bind: punished for being too resilient and punished again because others assume our resilience means we can carry unlimited trauma. The very act of speaking up—whether online or in professional spaces—too often multiplies the trauma instead of healing it.

Part I: The courage to share vs. the accusation of attention-seeking

It takes enormous bravery to share trauma publicly. Survivors risk exposure, judgment, and vulnerability—not to collect “brownie points,” but to advocate for change, to bring visibility to suffering, and to help others know they are not alone. Yet, instead of being honored, many are treated as if they’re attention-seeking. This response—rolling eyes, ignoring, or disengaging—turns advocacy into a fresh source of trauma:- Ignored. Survivors’ voices are met with silence because others mistake courage for self-promotion.

- Discounted. Advocacy is reduced to “drama” or “storytelling” instead of recognized as leadership.

- Re-traumatized. The lack of acknowledgment compounds the pain survivors already carry. So we must ask: is this why stories are being ignored? Because people assume sharing equals attention-seeking? If so, the dismissal itself becomes a new wound, betraying the very principles of trauma-informed care.

Part II: When resilience becomes a liability — the double‑bind of survival

My own experience highlights the opposite side of the paradox. Instead of being celebrated, my resilience has been turned against me:1. Punished for being “too resilient.” My story is sometimes ignored, dismissed, or disbelieved because it is “too much.” Colleagues and peers look away, leaving me erased from the conversation.2. Punished because I can “handle more.” Others project endless strength onto me. They assume that since I’ve survived so much, I can shoulder additional trauma. They pile on new burdens—asking me to speak for others, exposing me to triggering environments, or offloading responsibilities—because they believe I won’t break. This double-bind retraumatizes in two directions: erasure on one side, exploitation on the other.

Part III: When seeking help adds trauma — the data

• Dropout rates are high:- Across psychotherapy types, 20% of clients end treatment prematurely (APA).

• Meta-analyses show average dropout rates around 35%, with studies ranging from 10% to 81% across settings.

• Trauma-focused treatments (like CPT and PE) see dropout rates of 24%–29%, with some studies reporting as high as 36%, especially among veterans.2. Adverse effects and re-traumatization:- General psychotherapy carries the risk that 3%–15% of patients experience symptom worsening or develop new issues.

• Trauma-focused therapy can re-trigger symptoms, with clinicians reporting re-traumatization in about 3.4% of PTSD patients undergoing these treatments.

• Psychological debriefing—once common—is now considered potentially harmful, sometimes exacerbating symptoms.- At least 5% of therapy clients get worse, with harmful outcomes more common in marginalized populations.

Why this matters

Adding these statistics to our narrative underscores the core problem: even when we seek healing, the systems—online platforms, professional spaces, therapy itself—can retraumatize:- Survivors sharing their stories courageously are dismissed as attention-seekers.- Resilience double‑bind punishes strength and invites exploitation.- Therapy risks add layers of harm—silencing, abandonment, or deepening wounds.Together, these patterns show how systems often fail survivors across layers: social, professional, and therapeutic.

Recommendations

For individuals and peers

• Validate the courage of survivors who share their trauma stories.- Resist the comparison game. Listen without projecting—validate complexity without minimization.

For practitioners and advocates

• Do not dismiss survivors’ sharing with jealousy and as attention-seeking; it is advocacy.- Recognize resilience ≠ invulnerability. Strong survivors still need care and protection.- Monitor for distress. If dropout or worsening appears, check in—not with blame, but with support.

For organizations and funders

• Reward prevention, not performance. Fund results, not stories.- Value complexity. Multi-layered trauma narratives deserve recognition, not exclusion.- Audit survivor experience. Ask explicitly: Did you feel heard? Were you dismissed as attention-seeking?

For platforms and policy

• Reform algorithms that reward emotional bait and trauma exploitation.- Build context tools for trauma hashtags.- Give users control to mute triggering categories around sensitive life events.

Closing thought

Sharing trauma publicly is not about earning brownie points. It is an act of advocacy, courage, and community care. Survivors who do this are not seeking attention—they are offering the hardest parts of themselves in service of healing others. To ignore, dismiss, or burden them further is not only unfair—it is retraumatizing. The best story doesn’t always win, but the most courageous stories should never be treated as liabilities.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2015). Why do so many clients drop out of therapy? APA Monitor on Psychology.

• Swift, J. K., & Greenberg, R. P. (2012). Premature discontinuation in adult psychotherapy: Meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.

• Veterans Affairs National Center for PTSD. (2023). Dropout rates in PTSD treatments.

• Rozental, A., et al. (2018). Negative effects of psychological treatments: An updated systematic review. World Psychiatry.

• Sciencedirect (2024). Re-traumatization rates in trauma-focused therapy for PTSD.

• McNally, R. J., Bryant, R. A., & Ehlers, A. (2003). Psychological debriefing for trauma: Review and critique. Psychological Science in the Public Interest.

• Wired (2023). When therapy makes things worse