PTSD Claims – bmdpiano

  1. Brannan Vines has never been to war. But she’s got a warrior’s skills: hyperawareness, hypervigilance, adrenaline-sharp quick-scanning for danger, for triggers.
    1. This claim is factual, analogical and categorical.
    2. It is factual because it states that Brannan has never been to war. This must connect to the main idea.
    3. It is analogical because Brannan’s skills are being compared to ones of a warrior.
    4. It is categorical since the adjectives like hyper-awareness and hypervigilance are used. This ties into how PTSD belongs to a category of behaviors.
  1. Hypervigilance sounds innocuous, but it is in fact exhaustingly distressing, a conditioned response to life-threatening situations.
    1. There are factual claims and evaluative claims in this sentence.
    2. The facts come from when facts are stated such as when they explained that hypervigilance is exhausting and and conditioned response to threatening situations.
    3. The evaluative claim comes from the first part of the sentence. It is an opinion and can be argued but we can suppose it could be backed up by information.
  1. When we hear Caleb pulling back in the driveway, we jump up and grab their strings, plunging the living room back into its usual necessary darkness.
    1. This is a causal claim.
    2. The fact that Caleb has PTSD causes his family to have to create a specific environment to live in otherwise he gets triggered by the trauma. 
  1. Granted, diagnosing PTSD is a tricky thing. 
    1. This could be a definition or evaluative claim depending on how it is looked at. 
    2. It is defining the claim that PTSD is tricky, but it could be evaluative since diagnosing PTSD could be less tricky in other instances.
  1. When Caleb was finally screened for the severity of his TBI, Brannan says he got the second-worst score in the whole 18-county Gulf Coast VA system, which serves more than 50,000 veterans.
    1. This is an Evaluative Numerical Claim.
    2. The amount and severity of the TBI was evaluated and numerically compared to other cases which showed the severity of Caleb’s TBI. This is a claim made from other numerical information.
  1. “Everyone” includes children. Which is something Brannan and Caleb lose not a little sleep over, since they’ve got a six-year-old in the house.
    1. This is categorical since “everyone” is being clumped into the entire household and not just Caleb who has PTSD or even his wife. This is affecting everyone, even their daughter. 
  1. Brannan and Katie’s teacher have conferenced about Katie’s behavior many times. Brannan’s not surprised she’s picked up overreacting and yelling—you don’t have to be at the Vines residence for too long…
    1. This is a comparative claim.
    2. Caleb’s behavior in the house is rubbing off on Katie shaping her behavior to be similar even though she does not have PTSD.
    3. Caleb’s behavior is being compared to how Katie is now acting at school because this is what she is learning is okay at home, though she does not understand that Caleb has a disorder rather than associating this behavior to be normal.
This entry was posted in BmdPiano, Claims Analysis. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s