Governments play a pivotal role in supporting victims of terrorist attacks. Victims view compensation as a recognition of their injuries and an acknowledgment of the traumatic nature of terrorism, while prolonged compensation and limited validation and support can intensify mental health challenges. This study analyzed the impact that government aid and policies have on direct victims of terrorism, both during and post-event, and the effect that varying levels of support had on the recovery of victims. Using qualitative life history narratives, this study analyzed a sample of 22 direct victims regarding their experiences before, during, and after a terrorist attack. Three distinctive categories of government experiences were yielded: the good, the bad, and the ugly. ‘The good’ experiences included that they received adequate benefits from the government and had the opportunity to participate in criminal trials. ‘The bad’ experiences made a distinction between compensation granted to those who had physical injuries and those who had mental injuries. Finally, ‘the ugly’ experiences noted that the government failed to validate and accept their mental health complications post-event. Participants further expressed that some governments are undertrained in supporting victims in post-event trauma and provide inconsistent compensation for victims based on the extent of their injuries. Local and national governments should bolster policies to support the recovery of victims, incorporating recommendations of past victims.
Bos et al. (Tue,) studied this question.