Introduction
Since 2001, the population living on the border between Israel and the Palestinian Authority has been exposed to a continuous traumatic situation (Nuttman-Shwartz and Shoval-Zukerman Reference Nuttman-Shwartz and Shoval-Zukerman2016), which is characterised by sporadic attacks that sometimes occur at low intensity and sometimes involve intensive fire of missiles and mortar bombs (Lahad and Leykin Reference Lahad and Leykin2010). A continuous traumatic situation differs from a one-time occurrence in terms of its cumulative effect and in terms of the way it affects individuals’ perceptions of risk or feelings of insecurity, as well as in terms of the ways that individuals cope with the situation (Dickstein et al. Reference Dickstein, Schorr, Stein, Krantz, Solomon and Litz2012; Terr Reference Terr1991). In addition, the ongoing nature of the violent situations keeps individuals permanently on the alert and aroused. These populations ‘do not have time for respite and are thus constantly governed by their physiological reactions of fright or flight, or employ avoidance in the attempt to control these sensations’ (Lahad and Leykin Reference Lahad and Leykin2010: 695).
In continuous traumatic situations, previous traumatic events play a role together with fear of potential future traumatic events and/or with the actual current traumatic events that individuals and communities are regularly exposed to (Diamond et al. Reference Diamond, Lipsitz, Fajerman and Rozenblat2010; Nuttman-Shwartz and Shoval-Zukerman Reference Nuttman-Shwartz and Shoval-Zukerman2016; Pfefferbaum et al. Reference Pfefferbaum, Doughty, Gurwitch, North, Fullerton and Kyula2003). In addition, ‘crossover conditions are quite common and develop when one blow creates a long-standing series of adversity’ (Terr Reference Terr1991: 19), which constitutes an additional trauma in later life that reactivates traumatic memories and associations with an earlier trauma (Fossion et al. Reference Fossion, Leys, Kempenaers, Braun, Verbanck and Linkowski2015).
Studies conducted in localities along the confrontation line on the border between Israel and Gaza have revealed that over the years, an increasing number of residents have reported anxiety and post-traumatic stress reactions, but they have also reported growth and resilience (Besser et al. Reference Besser, Weinberg, Zeigler-Hill and Neria2014; Dekel and Nuttman-Shwartz Reference Dekel and Nuttman-Shwartz2009). One of the peak periods of exposure was in the summer of 2014, during the Israel–Hamas war. Unlike the previous operations, this one lasted 50 days. It was a particularly complex challenge for all of the residents of the region, including the older residents, most of whom stayed in the confrontation zone and did not leave their homes for short or long periods, in contrast to most of the young families with children (Shechory-Biton and Laufer Reference Shechory-Bitton and Laufer2015). This elicits the question: What are the characteristics of the older population that chooses to stay in the confrontation area, and what are the implications of that decision?
The impact of continuous exposure to a security threat on the older population
Existing knowledge about the impact of war and terror on the older population is based on three different perspectives, which combine theories relating to old age and ageing with theories relating to trauma. The first perspective emphasises the similarity between younger and older people (Bleich et al. Reference Bleich, Gelkopf, Melamed and Solomon2005), and continuity in personality traits and coping patterns (Atchley Reference Atchley1989). According to the second perspective, younger people are more resilient (Hantman, Solomon and Horen Reference Hantman, Solomon and Horen2002) than older people, who experience double stress deriving from processes of development accompanying old age and ageing as well as from exposure to traumatic events (Whitbourne Reference Whitbourne, Birren and Schaie1985). In contrast, the third perspective stresses the ability of older persons to cope and shows how they learn from life experiences, cope actively and are more resilient (Kahana and Kahana Reference Kahana, Kahana and Bengtson1996; Norris et al. Reference Norris, Friedman, Watson, Byrne, Diaz and Kaniasty2000).
Various studies have emphasised the differences between these perspectives, particularly with regard to the question of emotional trauma versus resilience and the ability to withstand traumatic events, in general, and events deriving from exposure, war and continuous threat, in particular (Band-Winterstein and Koren Reference Band-Winterstein and Koren2010). Several researchers have found that the older people do not differ from younger adults in their emotional reactions to trauma, whereas other studies have found that older people are a largely vulnerable group; they have fewer resources for coping with traumatic events than younger persons, and are at higher risk for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Solomon Reference Solomon1995). On the one hand, there are losses and difficult challenges that occur in conjunction with depletion of resources, especially in old age (Hayslip and Smith Reference Hayslip and Smith2012). On the other hand, researchers have asserted that the impact of prior stressors on older adults increases their ability to be resilient (Johnston, Bailey and Wilson Reference Johnston, Bailey and Wilson2014; Lavretsky Reference Lavretsky2012).
Several studies have been conducted among older people in Israel in the region where this research was carried out. The findings of qualitative as well as quantitative studies conducted in 2009 among older residents of kibbutzim in the region on the border of Gaza following a major military operation indicate that this population is resilient, and that the confrontation did not shape their life story despite the ongoing tensions. The resilience of the older residents has been attributed to their Zionist ideology, which reinforced their sense of belonging to the land. Even though most of them had survived the Holocaust, they were motivated to establish a rural communal locality in Israel near the border, in an undeveloped and dangerous area far from the centre of the country (Chaitin et al. Reference Chaitin, Sternberg, Arad, Barzili, Deray and Shinhar2012). The resilience of the population of the rural periphery in the southern and northern regions of Israel has also been noted in a general survey conducted in 2014 among older persons in Israel (Dahan and Schwartz Reference Dahan and Schwartz2014), as well as in a recent study conducted among a representative sample of the Jewish-Israeli older population (Eshel et al. Reference Eshel, Kimhi, Lahad and Leykin2016).
Several quantitative comparative studies conducted among young and older adults from the same region have revealed that the rate of older adults who develop post-traumatic symptoms is higher than the rate of younger adults (Gelkopf et al. Reference Gelkopf, Berger, Bleich and Cohen Silver2012; Nuttman-Shwartz, Dekel and Regev Reference Nuttman-Shwartz, Dekel and Regev2015; Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger Reference Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger2015). The study findings indicate that the age factor in itself was not related to responses. Rather, coping was found to be associated with previous exposure to traumatic events, personal resources and particularly with one's economic situation. In addition, it was found that coping is related to community resources, and particularly to one's sense of belonging to the community and appraisals of community resilience (Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger Reference Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger2015). In light of the debate in the literature and the dearth of research findings, the present study aimed to examine self-perceptions of coping patterns among older residents of rural communities near the Israeli border with Gaza during the Israel–Hamas war in the summer of 2014.
Against this background, the questions arise: What are the main themes and dilemmas that characterise older people living with an ongoing threat during a period of escalation? What are the emotions evoked during the threat that accompany the decisions of older people? What are the specific characteristics of coping among older residents of rural localities in the region? Do they choose to remain in their homes, or do they choose to join the younger residents and take a break from the region?
Method
Three focus groups were conducted at three different localities in September and October 2014, one to two months after the war. During that war, three residents of the area were killed – one four-year-old child whose family lived in one of the rural communities, and two adults who were security co-ordinators in a neighbourhood municipality. The sessions were attended by 43 older persons, all of whom were over age 65: 29 of the older participants (67%) were women. The first group had 25 participants, of whom 16 (64%) were women (group A); the second group had nine participants, all of whom were women (group B); and the third group had nine participants, of whom four (44%) were women (group C).
Instrument
Data were collected through three semi-structured focus groups, which are considered to be a comprehensive, effective and economical data collection method (Kitzinger Reference Kitzinger1995). The groups were conducted in two rural communities, and at the regional centre for the older people. Sessions lasted two to three hours. Participants were asked to introduce themselves, to describe their experiences during the war and to describe how they coped with the situation. They were also asked to talk about their experiences as residents of the region, and about their decision whether to stay in the area or leave. In addition, they were asked to relate to their accusations or to mention any other issues that came to mind which seemed to be connected to this reality.
Procedure
After a personal meeting with the researchers, and with the professional approval of the regional welfare department, the head of the local municipal services for the older people, and the gerontological social worker at the municipality, the co-ordinators of services for the older people were asked to invite older residents of the region to participate in a reflective meeting about their experiences during the war. All of the potential participants were informed in advance that the meeting would be documented for the purposes of the research. Written invitations to an open meeting were distributed to older residents in the region by the welfare workers and social workers for the older people. The researchers arrived at the meeting, and the focus groups began after the participants understood the aims of the meeting and the purpose of recording the sessions. The first two sessions were facilitated by two researchers, and the third session was facilitated by only one researcher. Both researchers are known in the region where the study was conducted. One of them is an expert in the field of trauma, and the other is an expert in the field of old age. Both of them have been working in the area on the Israeli border with Gaza in recent years, and have been exposed to the security threat themselves. All of the focus group sessions were recorded and transcribed.
Data analysis
The study utilised a qualitative-constructivist approach, which is based on thematic analysis (Hsieh and Shannon Reference Hsieh and Shannon2005). Thematic analysis relates to the participants’ statements and descriptions, which reflect their feelings, thoughts, beliefs and knowledge. Thematic analysis focuses primarily on what the participants say, as opposed to structuralised analysis which focuses on how they say it. At every stage, the method of analysis is based on the transparency of the process (Miles, Huberman and Saldana Reference Miles, Huberman and Saldana1994). The transcripts of the focus groups were analysed by the researchers with the aid of an external researcher on the basis of the qualitative content analysis method, which included three main steps: (a) reading the transcripts, and reviewing the different voices that emerge from them; (b) identifying the main units of meaning in each of the focus groups (Patton Reference Patton1990; Unrau and Coleman Reference Unrau, Coleman and Grinnell1997); and (c) organising the units of meaning into main themes that recurred in the content of the sessions. Following careful examination and re-examination of the transcripts, the units of meaning were organised into main themes that recurred in the content of the sessions. If the researchers disagreed about any of these aspects, they worked together to reach a consensus until the content was organised into units of meaning and general categories.
Findings
The research findings included four main themes: (a) moral issues: questions about leaving their place of residence or staying in the area; (b) emotional issues: the fluctuation between fear, ‘abandonment versus courage’, and maintaining a routine; (c) intergenerational issues: continuity versus change in generations; and (d) resilience: maintenance, containment and responsibility, as well as consideration of the future.
The findings will be presented by themes, sub-themes, gender (M = male, F = female) and group, and will include excerpts of statements by the participants.
(a) Moral issues
The main moral discussion was about staying home versus leaving the community and the area was one of the major issues discussed. The sub-themes related to this moral issue were: external responsibility versus internal responsibility, and justifying their leaving.
Staying home versus leaving the community.
In addition, the participants mentioned several meanings and associations related to leaving their place of residence. These included past personal associations and reactivation of the trauma, life story and assessment and thoughts about the end of life.
Meaning and associations related to leaving the place of residence.
(b) Emotional issues
Emotional issues were also a major part of the discussions in the three focus groups, particularly in the first group. This group had a large number of participants who lived very close to the border, and the four-year-old boy who was killed belonged to this small community. The emotions expressed by the participants included: a sense of fear, as well as related emotions such as helplessness, pain and fear of death and feelings related to relocation.
Sense of fear
This was the first emotion the participants mentioned. They talked directly or indirectly about their fears, and some of them even ignored that feeling by describing it as ‘lack of fear’ or attributing the feeling to their family members.
Related emotions.
Feelings related to relocation or to leaving the community
The second track of emotions was evoked as a result of being relocated. The community was divided between those who left and those who preferred or were forced to stay. The participants who left the community expressed more negative feelings such as loneliness, feeling like a refugee, and feeling alien and abandoned. In contrast, the participants who stayed in the area expressed their anger and frustration towards the young families of the community as well as towards the policy makers, including the Israeli army commanders. Just a few participants showed empathy towards those who expressed fear and towards those who chose to leave the community.
(c) Intergenerational issues: continuity versus generational change
The older participants in the study were first-generation residents of the kibbutzim who were enacting a vision of community and social values, in contrast to members of the next generation who felt less allegiance to the community, as reflected in the orientation towards individualism and privatisation which characterises the Western world. As such, the discussion moved beyond the issue of war to the issue of relationships between parents and children, as can be expected at the stage of ageing. The participants mentioned differences in the perspectives of parents and children, as well as differences in the spirit of the times from one generation to the next. It is important to note that this theme was mainly mentioned by participants in the first group, who were from the kibbutz where a child was killed. The war situation ‘helps’ the older people continue in the parenting role and see the differences between the older and younger generations.
The war situation stressed differences between the two generations.
Other participants were able to accept and understand age differences as well as differences in family conditions, and expressed empathy in an attempt to bridge the gap between the generations.
The middle generation sees their children – every knock on the door … that makes the fear. I wasn't afraid – the young parents are responsible for their children. (M, group A)
You can't blame a family with babies for not being able to endure [the situation and reaching the] point when they have to travel to the North. We need to understand the young families, I am concerned about them. (M, group A)
Beyond the war, and maybe as a result of waking up to reality, some of the participants expressed a feeling of failure in their life's work and education. Others talked directly about their life stage. They mentioned that they had lots of experiences and were ready to end their life.
(d) Resilience versus weakness
The term ‘resilience’ was also raised in the group discourse (‘living here [on the kibbutz] is resilience’). Beyond their declarations, the participants considered whether they should stay on or leave, at least temporarily. This was framed by the participants in all three groups as a question of resilience versus weakness.
The participants raised this question, and offered a variety of possibilities ranging from the individual level to the level of the state. They mentioned the older members, the younger members, the security teams, welfare workers, sub-groups in the community, and even the army and the state. Most of them expressed their vulnerability and coined it as ‘broken resilience’, whereas others talked about the future. There were also positive expressions that shed light on the participants’ lived experiences and their optimistic views.
Discussion
The findings presented here reflect the main dilemmas of the older residents during the latest war between Israel and the Hamas. The themes raised by the participants can be categorised as: (a) issues relating to the normative developmental stage of the older participants (e.g. the issue of intergenerational conflict, including questions about the future and the legacy that the participants leave behind, as well as questions about the ability to face reality and engage in self-examination (Gould Reference Gould1978; Whitbourne Reference Whitbourne, Birren and Schaie1985); (b) the moral question relating to the image and identity of their community in the contemporary era and processes of expansion from a collective society to a society that emphasises individualism (Itzhaky Reference Itzhaky2003); and (c) issues relating to the security situation and exposure to threat, which include questions relating to traumatic experiences and questions relating to emotional and behavioural coping patterns, as well as questions relating to resilience (Bonanno, Romero and Klein Reference Bonanno, Romero and Klein2015; Fossion et al. Reference Fossion, Leys, Kempenaers, Braun, Verbanck and Linkowski2015). Beyond that, the findings revealed that the issues are intertwined, and that they need to be considered together.
The most significant emotional aspect was the fear reaction that accompanied continuous exposure, which other studies have found to play a dominant role in understanding the implications of the phenomenon. Fear of the next missile attack shapes coping patterns more than fear of a missile that has already fallen (Diamond et al. Reference Diamond, Lipsitz, Fajerman and Rozenblat2010). However, the participants were clearly apprehensive about emphasising this reaction, possibly due to their historical ethos as well as to behaviour norms relating to their ideology and their past, as well as to their preferred perspectives of resilience. The findings shed light on the emergence of a breach in beliefs about staying on the border, belief in the mission and faith in the establishment. Similar motifs have been found in previous studies conducted among residents of the city closest to the border (Dekel and Nuttman-Shwartz Reference Dekel and Nuttman-Shwartz2009; Diamond et al. Reference Diamond, Lipsitz, Fajerman and Rozenblat2010).
The discussion of fear and fearlessness was characterised by a dichotomous perspective which attests to the emotional aspect of responses to traumatic events, as well as to the behavioural aspect of those responses and to the role of interpersonal relations (Price Reference Price2007). The participants noted that when the feeling of helplessness was accompanied by a division in the community, it reduced the participants’ personal ability to function, posed a burden for their families and left them in a position where they were waiting for someone from outside to make a decision about the best situation for them. Some of the participants could not reconcile the division. It aroused anger and hostility, which was mainly directed towards the younger members who responded and behaved differently (Finklestein Reference Finklestein2016). The division also aroused hostility towards others who accepted the decisions, acted differently than they did in the past and deviated from the accepted norm. This situation has been found to characterise conflicts related to terror, war and continuous traumatic exposure (Raufman and Weinberg Reference Raufman, Weinberg, Friedman and Doron2015).
With regard to the issue of living in the shadow of war, the findings indicate that the participants talked about personal, family and community patterns of coping with the threat. These coping patterns, which were translated into proactive behaviour at the time of the military operation, have been found in previous research and are consistent with the age of the participants in this study (Kahana and Kahana Reference Kahana, Kahana and Bengtson1996). A comprehensive examination of the findings reveals that the participants focused not only on fear responses (and fearlessness), but also on issues of location-based identity and community, i.e. the questions of leaving their place of residence and responsibility. The concern with these aspects increased after people were hurt and one child was killed – events that made the existential struggle real.
The references to history and feelings such as attachment to the land highlighted the participants’ past experiences and their associations with the question of staying in the area or leaving in an emergency. As shown in the literature, at the stage of late adulthood events in the past, including traumatic history, often shape the present and the future. Therefore, it is not surprising that the participants talked about the experience of being refugees, the need to settle the land and the importance that they attribute to the land. Whereas recollections and reconstruction of these traumatic experiences can be viewed as part of the developmental stage of age and ageing (Fossion et al. Reference Fossion, Leys, Kempenaers, Braun, Verbanck and Linkowski2015), they can also be viewed as part of coping processes in late adulthood (Sneed and Whitbourne Reference Sneed and Whitbourne2005). The references to feelings of attachment and belonging to the place and to the land have also been revealed in other studies on evacuation following natural disasters and political evacuations (Billig Reference Billig, Miller and Moore2013). On the whole, there were no substantial gender differences in the participants’ responses. However, among the participants from the community where the child was killed the men played a more dominant role in the group discussion than the women.
The dilemma of staying in their community or leaving focused not only on the security situation and the participants’ sense of security. Beyond that, the participants mentioned age-related issues such as the aspect of continuity, particularly in the context of family ties and intergenerational relationships. The issue of following in the parents’ footsteps and perpetuating their life's work, on the one hand, and the desire to create a better future for their children, on the other, was not necessarily an outcome of the security situation. It is possible that the security situation limited the boundaries of the discourse and the choice about continuity or independence for the older participants as well as for their adult offspring. The fact that most of the participants’ children had chosen to leave created an emotional and instrumental void for the parents. According to Hobfoll's (Reference Hobfoll1989) Conservation of Resources theory, this situation can also impair the parents’ ability to cope with security problems. In addition, it is possible that those parent–child dynamics are projected to all of the community residents, regardless of concrete family relationships. As expected of other people who are ageing, the participants complained about their children, questioned their behaviour patterns and even made an effort to continue performing the parental role. However, consistent with the findings of other studies, the participants felt that because they were old and often had functional disabilities, they had become dependent on their children (Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger Reference Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger2015). In addition, as found in previous research, exposure to tension might harm and change interpersonal and family relations and functioning (Pagorek-Eshel and Dekel Reference Pagorek-Eshel and Dekel2015). As mentioned, this issue was raised mainly during the period after the war, when the participants talked about the conflict between the younger and older members, as well as about conflicts among the older members themselves.
It is important to realise that participants of the community in which the child was killed mentioned that event and talked about the impact that the death of a four-year-old child who was hit by a mortar bomb had on general plans to raise children in the region and on the possibility for young families to live in the community. Some of the participants used the security situation as an opportunity to maintain their parental role, even though their children were mature enough to manage by themselves and even had families of their own.
A good and supportive subjective view of intergenerational family relations provided the basis for the narrative and for the way that the participants described leaving the area during the war. It may also have provided them with legitimation for leaving the place, which they described as a response to their children's needs (babysitting, taking a break for short intervals). In extreme cases, they described it as evacuation and being refugees. Thus, besides enabling the participants to provide instrumental help, this pattern also served as a defensive solution for their mental state, which derived from the moral and ideological changes they were witnessing in their community as well as from the need to cope with the security situation.
Another perspective elicited from the participants’ statements relates to the situation in which the offspring of the older members left and young families joined the community. In this connection, the participants expressed a sense of sadness and disappointment with their offspring who did not follow in their footsteps, as well as disappointment with the new families, many of whom lack the roots and ideology of the founding generation. Besides the intergenerational conflict, which takes place beyond the immediate crisis generated by the military operation, only a few of the participants talked about the future. This situation might derive from the changes that are taking place in the communities, which make it difficult to create a future. It may also be reflected in the existential fear expressed by all of the participants. Thus, the developmental and generational conflicts are combined with the ideological conflict about the future of the community and the future of the collective orientation. As mentioned, the participants also expressed the clear dilemma with regard to staying or leaving, even temporarily, while coping with life in the shadow of war.
In addition, the findings shed light on the internal and public negotiations that are taking place with regard to resilience. It is interesting to note that most of the statements related to personal responsibility for managing the situation. This might be indicative of the participants’ generational role (Spector-Mersel Reference Spector-Mersel2008), as reflected in high resilience (Bonanno Reference Bonanno2004). The generational role is also reflected in statements that are consistent with the participants’ age and derive from their life experience as well as from past events in their lives, which they used in an attempt to attribute meaning to the current problem (Carstensen Reference Carstensen1995; Fossion et al. Reference Fossion, Leys, Kempenaers, Braun, Verbanck and Linkowski2015).
Although the participants reported high levels of functioning and a sense of personal resilience, they had difficulty communicating with their children who chose to leave. In addition, they had difficulty negotiating with other entities within and outside the community as well as with the service providers who were responsible for the regional community system, with the army and with the government authorities. The experience of detachment, incomprehension and even betrayal by the authorities described by the participants in this study is consistent with the results of previous research which revealed that these feelings accompanied continuous exposure to missile attacks and even reduced the sense of resilience among residents in the area (Diamond et al. Reference Diamond, Lipsitz, Fajerman and Rozenblat2010).
The high intensity and long duration of the most recent threat may have changed the participants’ balance of personal resilience and reduced their ability to seek help. This explanation is supported by other results, which have shown that ageing people have difficulty dealing with continuous exposure to threat (Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger Reference Palgi, Gelkopf and Berger2015). Moreover, it is possible that the participants’ insistence on performing essential functions and on emphasising their role as parents and grandparents served to reinforce their sense of personal resistance. Furthermore, contrary to prevailing opinion and to the findings of previous studies on the sense of belonging to the community (Nuttman-Shwartz, Dekel and Regev Reference Nuttman-Shwartz, Dekel and Regev2015), very few participants mentioned the community and social systems that provide services. Evidently they relied mainly on themselves and on their family members. In fact, the older population of kibbutzim is considered to be a strong population that maintains supportive relationships with their families (Dahan and Schwartz Reference Dahan and Schwartz2014).
The findings indicate that there is a range of resilience levels, with ‘I fend for myself’ at one extreme, and ‘lack of control’ and ‘dependence on others’ at the other extreme. In this case, ‘others’ ranged from family members at one end to external factors at the other (particularly the army which gives instructions about what to do). This extreme end of the continuum caused major disappointment following the resumption of fire after the army gave an order to return, and particularly in light of the tragic events that occurred when the families returned – the ultimate tragedy being the death of a four-year-old boy from a mortar bomb. Without a doubt, this tragic outcome reduced the confidence of individuals in the state and government institutions, which in turn reduced their sense of resilience. The fact that the decision to stay or leave was not accompanied by clear instructions forced people to listen to themselves. In keeping with other research findings, the results of this study emphasised that efforts to organise at the individual, interpersonal and family levels provided reinforcement to the participants and their families, and enabled them to cope successfully with the threat and the war. However, at the community and system-wide levels, the participants’ sense of resilience was undermined. Their inability to benefit from the resources that were provided, and the community's inability to engage in a dialogue with its members about their needs and responses, constituted a shortcoming in terms of ecological resilience (Ungar Reference Ungar2013). Studies have shown that the government should provide services and assume responsibility in order to increase the resilience of the residents of these areas (Bonanno et al. Reference Bonanno, Romero and Klein2015).
Before concluding, some limitations of the study should be mentioned. The communities that were examined do not reflect the situation in all of the localities in the region. Nor did the study examine the participants’ perspectives before the military tensions (14 years ago) and before the present confrontation. In addition, although the sample was homogeneous in terms of the identity and location of the community, it was not homogeneous in terms of age, as it included a wide range of older participants between the ages of 65 and 90. Nonetheless, the themes raised by the participants were consistent. Furthermore, the younger residents in those communities were not asked about their coping strategies during the operation or about their perspective of the coping strategies adopted by the older residents. This information would enhance the validity of the older participants’ subjective experience regarding the functioning of the community as a whole and their own functioning during the army operation.
Notwithstanding these limitations, the findings of this study make an important contribution to understanding the intrapersonal and interpersonal processes that characterise war and continuous threat situations, as well as to understanding the issue of coping with those situations. Moreover, the findings indicate that the continuous threat posed a challenge for the older residents and for the community as a whole in terms of security as well as in terms of social, generational and developmental aspects.
The findings highlight that coping patterns derive from the participants’ life stage, from the changing kibbutz structures and the intergenerational differences in those patterns. Hence, before the next confrontation there is a need to continue examining issues such as: intergenerational relations; the social, ideological and identity changes in the community; and how to enhance resilience among individuals and communities in order to improve their natural attributes and enhance their ability for containment. In addition, a contingency plan should be devised to evacuate and protect residents so that no one is neglected. Finally, we recommend that future research should deal with the relevance of ecological, trauma and resilience models to personal, community and public coping in normal routine situations and in emergencies. It would also be worthwhile examining these issues from a comparative perspective among other groups of participants and under other conditions.
Acknowledgement
This research was partially funded by a Yad Tabenkin scholarship for research, 2016.
