{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02891708468574801, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012688108586603719, 'mean_word_length': 5.277777777777778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 1, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Mental resilience in dealing with traumatic events

At the time of writing this editorial, the recent tragic mosque shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, are still subject to what will be a very complex and large-scale forensic investigation and legal proceedings. The pain and suffering endured by victims of the shooting and their families alike is still raw and words simply cannot begin to articulate how these innocent people have been affected. All that can be done within the scope of this editorial is to offer my deepest sympathies and condolences to all affected. However, such events do not just impact the victims, their families, friends and broader society in general. Law enforcement, emergency services and forensic scientists, especially those involved in medico-legal investigations, are directly involved in the management and processing of crime scenes involving death, sometimes on a mass scale, and frequently involving not only adults, but as was the case in Christchurch, children. This brings to the fore the role that first and last responders have in managing tragic occurrences such as this. Then there is also the judiciary who, in one form or another, will likely be required to consider in minute detail every aspect of cases such as this, as potentially once again (sometimes many years later) will witnesses, survivors and the families of victims. For many forensic practitioners, dealing with the circumstance of death, whether deliberate or otherwise, is a daily occurrence and one that takes a mental toll. This is not to single out ‘death investigators’ and the judiciary – the stress of working with not only victims, but also perpetrators, of heinous crimes certainly impacts those involved in, for example, the psychological forensic sciences. Recently, Rosansky et al.1 noted that following exposure to traumatic events, including death scenes, natural disasters, serious injury and sexual violence, highly trained Crime Scene Investigators (CSIs) in the United States are developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PSD). The latter is certainly not an unknown side effect of forensic practice and such impacts are anecdotally well known and have also been empirically demonstrated multiple times in the literature across a spectrum of disciplines, e.g. 2–6. What is perhaps imperative, however, are overt discussions around support networks and various coping strategies. Whilst I am not personally qualified to offer any professional advice on coping tactics following exposure to traumatic events, there are bound to be appropriate established measures within one’s workplace designed to assist with, for example, mental health and well-being. Within Australia, Work Health Safety laws require, so far is reasonably practicable, employers to manage risks from workplace psychological hazards7; similar acts apply in the United Kingdom8. For those independent practitioners, access to such resources may be achieved through private consultations with appropriate medical providers. The importance of engagement with social networks should also not be overlooked as a possible avenue of support. Following that reasoning, Rosansky et al. encourage more effective coping strategies for forensic (and other) practitioners, ‘...such AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF FORENSIC SCIENCES 2019, VOL. 51, NO. 4, 369–370 https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2019.1608700