Knowing how to interview victims of traumatic events with compassion is essential to making certain that you do not, unwittingly, retraumatize an individual who is already suffering from exposure to a critical incident. Depending upon how you handle your interview, you can either provide the opportunity for the victim to gain emotional support through telling his story or exploit his pain by dispassionately putting your story ahead of his feelings of horror and grief .
Suppose you are with the journalistic team from the local news channel covering a fire in a downtown high rise apartment complex. Like all the other media on location, you've got one eye on your camera crew while the other scans the crowd for a story in the making.
Someone in the crowd yells out to no one in particular, "Hey, see that lady over there crying? Her kid's inside that building!"
Your adrenaline surges and excitement mounts as you elbow your way through the crowd. This may be just the story you want. But is shoving a microphone in a frightened and traumatized mother's face an ethical way to go about getting it?
"Ma'am, I understand your daughter may be trapped inside. What goes through the mind of a parent at a time like this? Would you care to comment?"
Stop Tape. Take a step back. If you temper your desire for a story with empathy for your subject, you will seriously think about how you plan to interview any victim of a traumatic event.
An individual who is suffering as the result of a critical incident is at risk for acute stress. Whether or not such a person is able to recover and move on with life within six months to a year of the trauma depends a lot upon what happens in the first twenty-four hours after the traumatic event. As a journalist, you can either play a role in offering compassion and comfort to a victim, or add further suffering and be the catalyst for secondary trauma; either way, you'll get your story.
Let's be pragmatic for a moment. You are a journalist. You don't want to be insensitive, but you do have a job to do. You want to get the facts and share a story that will engage your audience. The place to start, however, isn't by pummeling a victim with questions, especially questions that will prematurely force the individual to face the full impact of the unfolding event.
So, how do you approach with sensitivity? The best way is to begin with a verbal affirmation that demonstrates your awareness of the pain that the victim is feeling. Your first words should sound something like this:
"Ma'am, I'm Matt with Channel Nine News. I can't begin to imagine how incredibly difficult this must be for you. I'm sure that there are many folks out here tonight that would like to offer their support by sending some kind thoughts, perhaps even prayers, your way."
By validating your awareness of the victim's emotional pain, you can begin to pave the way for an unsolicited story to unfold; one that will be shared spontaneously and in response to your kindness. Identifying both your name and the agency you represent is a way to be both personable and honest.
Once a victim senses your sincerity and solicitousness, he or she is more likely to voluntarily share, not only feelings, but perhaps even some of the details of what is unfolding. The sooner a victim has the opportunity to share even a portion of the traumatic experience with a sympathetic listener, the more quickly the healing process begins. A compassionate journalist has the opportunity to get the story and still be therapeutic in the approach.
Let's return to the scene of the apartment fire. You have just attempted to engage the victim with words similar to those suggested above. The young mother responds to your compassion.
"That's my little girl in there. That's my baby." She continues to cry softly.
You respond, "Yes, ma'am. May I ask your daughter's name?"
By asking for a name, you are connecting with the victim and making your interview less threatening. As you move into your actual interview, you do so by either making statements of fact, or asking non-threatening questions. Too liberal a dose of reality can cause protracted distress or force a victim to face truths that he or she is emotionally or mentally ill-prepared to confront.
After a couple minutes of dialog, during which time you have continued to exhibit compassion while seeding the conversation with pieces of information about the traumatic event, it is appropriate to engage the victim on a personal level. You may do so by inviting the victim to share feelings, thoughts, and any additional details that can be added to help the viewer understand the unfolding events. Any of the following questions would be suitable at this point in the interview:
1. "Ma'am may I ask your name?"
2. "How old is your daughter, Mrs. Jones?"
3. "Is your apartment located near the top of the building?"
4. "Is there anything you'd like to tell those of us who are believing and hoping with you at this moment?"
Asking a victim for details about the actual traumatic event, places him or her at greater risk for sustained trauma. A victim's wishes should also take precedence over journalistic fervor. Questions should be kept to a minimum; perhaps no more than three or four. When the individual indicates a desire for the communication to end, it should be respected. At this point, a compassionate journalist briefly recounts the known facts, mentioning again that crew and audience both send out hopes and kind thoughts for a positive outcome to the traumatic event.
Any other information that is needed to fill gaps in an interview can usually be obtained by questioning bystanders as well as critical incident staff and law enforcement.
When interviews are conducted after a traumatic event, the same sensitivity and compassion should be shown. Basic guidelines for the interview remain unchanged. A victim who is being interviewed within a day or two of the critical event may still be in shock. A respectful journalist always remembers that what, to him, is "just a story", is a shocking and painful reality in the life of the victim of a traumatic event.