Why Can't People Get to Work? The Relationship Between "Trauma and Employment" as Shown by Danish Data

Why Can't People Get to Work? The Relationship Between "Trauma and Employment" as Shown by Danish Data

When people hear "employment support for refugees," many first think of language education, vocational training, resume writing, and job matching. However, there is a group for whom these "orthodox methods" are less effective. It's not so much a matter of ability or motivation, but rather that the mental and physical foundation needed for daily life has crumbled.


The study reported by Phys.org visualized this "lack of reach" in numbers. The subjects were Ukrainian refugees who arrived in Denmark between the start of Russia's full-scale invasion (February 24, 2022) and September 30, 2022. The research team conducted a survey shortly after their arrival to measure the state of "probable PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder)," and then tracked them by linking this to subsequent employment records (administrative data).


"About 1 in 3" and "7.4-point difference"

The article conveys a simple yet strong message. Among Ukrainian refugees in Denmark, about 1 in 3 may have war trauma. Moreover, their employment rate is 7.4 points lower compared to those without such trauma.


What's more important is "after being able to work." Even among those who could find employment, those showing signs of PTSD work fewer hours per month. On the other hand, their hourly wages do not significantly differ. This suggests that it's not so much about being "exploited for low wages," but rather a stronger aspect of "not being able to secure working hours (activity)."


This "time barrier" should resonate with those who have a sense of the field. To work, one needs to prepare for commuting, travel, understand instructions, manage interpersonal relationships, and maintain a certain level of concentration. Trauma responses directly impact these areas. Sleep quality, attention, hyperarousal, flashbacks, avoidance—these symptoms cannot be overcome by "willpower." The study reinterpreted this "function" as employment outcomes.


Early growth, plateau in a year—employment "ceiling"

The research insights indicate that while the employment rate rises for a while after arrival, it slows down after about a year. The gap between those with and without PTSD symptoms also becomes harder to close around the same time.


According to the summary by Phys.org, the employment rate rises to 51% six months after arrival and to 68% after two years, while the employment rate for Danes is about 80%, illustrating a persistent gap even as integration progresses.


It's important to note that the study does not claim "language is not important." Rather, it shows that the positive impact of English proficiency on employment is about +4 points, whereas the negative impact related to PTSD is larger (about 7 points).

This suggests that "other constraints," which cannot be explained solely by language, work history, or system design, may be creating a ceiling for integration.


"Probable PTSD" is not a diagnosis, but it's significant enough for policy

The study clarifies that it uses "probable PTSD," based on a scale aligned with diagnostic criteria, rather than a confirmed diagnosis by a physician.


This point should be handled carefully, but it is also crucial from a policy design perspective. What is needed at the entry point of support is not necessarily a diagnosis, but a system to quickly assess whether a person is struggling with the functions necessary for employment. The research team also states that early psychological screening and support focused on symptoms can complement existing integration policies.


SNS Reactions: Researchers and Practitioners Emphasize "Blind Spots" in Integration Policy

This study has a tone closer to policy recommendations than an academic paper. Therefore, on social media, reactions pointing out "gaps in the system" are more noticeable than emotional arguments.


Reaction ①: Focus on the "Impact of PTSD" Greater than English
On LinkedIn, researchers involved in the study emphasize the point that "the impact on employment is greater than the effect of English fluency," advocating for the necessity of mental health screening in refugee integration.

Reaction ②: Persuasiveness Shown by Interdisciplinary Approach of Economics × Psychology
Another post views the intersection of trauma research and economics (economic assimilation model of immigrants) as an achievement in itself, appreciating the point of "linking mental health measurements to administrative employment records."


Reaction ③: Towards Practical Application—"Guidelines for Frontline Staff"
Media reactions introduced by RFBerlin highlight points close to the field of support for those affected, such as "policy does not adequately address the impact of PTSD" and "it is possible at low cost for employment support frontline staff to understand PTSD and have guidelines for support methods."


Summarizing SNS reactions, the focus is more on "design" than "sympathy." There is a certain number of people who will not improve with just language, vocational training, and incentive enhancement, and unless this "blockage" is resolved, integration will hit a ceiling—this is the problem being raised.

So, what should be changed? The idea of rearranging the "order of support"

Integration policies are often based on the premise that "if you increase abilities, you can work." However, the study shows that "when daily functioning is impaired before ability, the same measures are less effective."


Therefore, what's needed may be "optimization of order" rather than increasing measures.

  • First, conduct psychological screening to identify those who need "preliminary" employment support

  • For that group, incorporate interventions that support short-term symptom reduction and self-management

  • Then connect them to language, vocational training, and matching (or run them concurrently)


The study states that such early support can fill the "gaps" in existing integration measures, while also acknowledging the need for additional research on which interventions work for whom and their cost-effectiveness.

Points to Note: How to Read This Study

Finally, there are reservations that readers should be aware of.


This study is a Discussion Paper, and RFBerlin itself clarifies that it may include "preliminary findings before peer review." There are also points related to survey design, such as response rates (e.g., 45%).


Nevertheless, its value lies in creating a foundation for discussing the relationship between trauma and employment not as "a matter of perception" but as "quantitative" by linking "symptom measurement immediately after arrival" with "administrative employment records."


When discussing refugee employment, we tend to lean on the dichotomy of "willingness to work" versus "leniency or strictness of the system." However, in reality, there is a deeper question before that: "Are they in a state to work?" Shifting support from a "skills issue" to a "recovery and functionality issue"—this study urges such a change in perspective.


Source URL

Related Articles